Aims

This study sought to compare the rate of deep surgical site infection (SSI), as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) definition, after surgery for a fracture of the hip between patients treated with standard dressings and those treated with incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT). Secondary objectives included determining the rate of recruitment and willingness to participate in the trial.

Aims. To compare the cost-utility of standard dressing with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) in adults with closed surgical wounds associated with major trauma to the lower limbs. Methods. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective based on data collected from the Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma (WHiST) multicentre randomized clinical trial. Health resource utilization was collected over a six-month post-randomization period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-utility was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates while uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The incremental cost of standard dressing versus iNPWT over six months was £2,037 (95% confidence interval (CI) £349 to £3,724). There was an insignificant increment in QALYs gained in the iNPWT group (0.005, 95% CI -0.018 to 0.028). The probability of iNPWT being cost-effective at £20,000 per QALY was 1.9%. The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis. Conclusion. The within-trial economic evaluation suggests that iNPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to standard dressing in adults with closed surgical wounds to their lower limbs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1072–1081

Aims. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard wound management after initial surgical wound debridement in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb. Patients and Methods. An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the United Kingdom NHS and Personal Social Services, based on evidence from the 460 participants in the Wound Management of Open Lower Limb Fractures (WOLLF) trial. Economic outcomes were collected prospectively over the 12-month follow-up period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Bivariate regression of costs (given in £, 2014 to 2015 prices) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with multiple imputation of missing data, was conducted to estimate the incremental cost per QALY gained associated with NPWT dressings. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were undertaken to assess the impacts of uncertainty and heterogeneity, respectively, surrounding aspects of the economic evaluation. Results. The base case analysis produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £267 910 per QALY gained, reflecting higher costs on average (£678; 95% confidence interval (CI) -£1082 to £2438) and only marginally higher QALYS (0.002; 95% CI -0.054 to 0.059) in the NPWT group. The probability that NPWT is cost-effective in this patient population did not exceed 27% regardless of the value of the cost-effectiveness threshold. This result remained robust to several sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Conclusion. This trial-based economic evaluation suggests that NPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective strategy for improving outcomes in adult patients with severe open fractures of the lower limb. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1392–1401

Aims

The aim of this study was to estimate economic outcomes associated with deep surgical site infection (SSI) in patients with an open fracture of the lower limb.