Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of alternating pressure mattresses compared with alternating pressure overlays for the prevention of pressure ulcers in patients admitted to hospital.
Design: Cost effectiveness analysis carried out alongside the pressure relieving support surfaces (PRESSURE) trial; a multicentre UK based pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
Setting: 11 hospitals in six UK NHS trusts.
Participants: Intention to treat population comprising 1971 participants.
Main outcome measures: Kaplan Meier estimates of restricted mean time to development of pressure ulcers and total costs for treatment in hospital.
Results: Alternating pressure mattresses were associated with lower overall costs (283.6 pounds sterling per patient on average, 95% confidence interval--377.59 pounds sterling to 976.79 pounds sterling) mainly due to reduced length of stay in hospital, and greater benefits (a delay in time to ulceration of 10.64 days on average,--24.40 to 3.09). The differences in health benefits and total costs for hospital stay between alternating pressure mattresses and alternating pressure overlays were not statistically significant; however, a cost effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that on average alternating pressure mattresses compared with alternating pressure overlays were associated with an 80% probability of being cost saving.
Conclusion: Alternating pressure mattresses for the prevention of pressure ulcers are more likely to be cost effective and are more acceptable to patients than alternating pressure overlays.