Abstract
A comparison of the cost-effectiveness of becaplermin plus good wound care (BGWC) versus good wound care (GWC) alone in treating patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) may enable physicians and health-care decision makers in the United States to make better-informed choices about treating DFUs, which currently contribute to a substantial portion of the economic burden of diabetes. Data from three phase III trials were used to predict expected 1-year costs and outcomes, including the average percentage reduction from baseline in wound surface area (WSA), the direct costs of DFU therapy, and the cost per cm(2) of WSA reduction. At 20 weeks, the BGWC group had a statistically greater probability of complete wound closure than the GWC group (50% versus 35%; P = .015). Based on reported WSA reduction rates, DFUs in the BGWC group were predicted to close by 100% at 27 weeks, and those in the GWC group were predicted to close by 88% at 52 weeks. The GWC group had higher total estimated 1-year direct cost of DFU care ($6,809 versus $4,414) and higher cost per cm(2) of wound closure ($3,501 versus $2,006). Becaplermin plus good wound care demonstrated economic dominance compared with GWC by providing better clinical outcomes via faster reduction in WSA and higher rates of closure at a lower direct cost.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
