Objective: The aim of this cost-effectiveness analysis was to estimate the monetary cost required to achieve a gain in health benefit. An analytic model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a topical medical device comprising a mixture of hyaluronic acid and amino acids (HA+AA medical device) (Vulnamin, Professional Dietetics SpA, Italy) as compared to standard of care (SoC) for hard-to-heal (chronic) wounds is presented.
Method: Retrospective data was analysed from a cohort of patients as well as information from published literature. For each paper, the following information was extracted: number of patients enrolled in each treatment arm and the results of prespecified reviewed outcomes.
Results: A total of six studies involving 378 patients were included in this pooled analysis. Findings showed that treatment with the HA+AA medical device has the potential to lower consumption of resources. With regards to wound healing, in both superficial and deep wounds, treatment benefits of the HA+AA medical device included: rapid wound size reduction; faster healing; reduction of dressing changes; reduced infection risk; and reduced treatment costs. Results showed the HA+AA medical device to be 32% more cost-effective than comparators in the treatment of hard-to-heal wounds (time horizon selected=six months).
Conclusion: The findings of this analysis showed that treatment with the HA+AA medical device is a valid alternative to SoC care because it is cheaper, and its utility and effectiveness are greater. In addition, the results of the analysis showed a direct relationship between the time to complete healing and the increase in costs (increasing the period of time to reach complete healing increases the costs associated with the treatment).
Keywords: Vulnamin; chronic wound; cost-effectiveness; costs; deep wound; hard-to-heal; hyaluronic acid; wound; wound care; wound dressing; wound healing.