Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39474346›Full record

ArticleHealth science reports2024

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of a chloramine gel in treating infected, non-healing diabetic foot ulcers.

Julian F Guest, Björn Eliasson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Julian F GuestCatalyst Consultants Poole UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0162-2007
Björn EliassonDepartment of Medicine Sahlgrenska University Hospital Gothenburg Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2569-4160

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and aims: Organic chloramines have been developed as a topical wound bed preparation gel. This study aimed to estimate whether the addition of chloramine gel (Chlorasolv, RLS Global AB, Sweden) to standard care compared with standard care alone would afford a cost‑effective technology to the UK's health services for treating infected, non-healing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate the management of infected, non-healing DFUs. The model utilised data from a randomised controlled trial and was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of chloramine plus standard care compared with standard care alone over a period of 24 weeks, expressed as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2021/22 prices. Results: Using adjunctive chloramine to treat infected, non-healing DFUs was found to shorten the time to healing by 36% (from a mean of 17.1 weeks per ulcer to a mean of 11.0 weeks per ulcer). This translated into a 6% improvement in the probability of being healed by 24 weeks and a corresponding 3% improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Also, use of adjunctive chloramine was found to reduce the total cost of ulcer management by 13%. Sensitivity analysis found that adjunctive chloramine remained a cost-effective treatment, even when the value of the model inputs was varied by ±20%. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, treatment with adjunctive chloramine instead of standard care alone could potentially afford the UK's health services a cost-effective debridement strategy for infected, non-healing DFUs, due to its ability to accelerate the time to healing.

Indexed as

chloraminechlorasolvcost‐effectivenessdebridementdiabetic foot ulcerUK

Identifiers

PMID39474346
PMCPMC11518887

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.