Assessing the healthcare costs associated with venous leg ulcer compression bandages

Abstract

Aim: To determine the monetary costs identified in economic evaluations of treatment with compression bandages among adults with venous leg ulcers (VLU). Method: A scoping review of existing publications was conducted in February 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used. Results: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. To place the costs of treatment into context, these are reported in conjunction with the healing rates. Three comparisons were made: 1.4 layer compression versus no compression (3 studies). One study reported that 4 layer compression was more expensive than usual care (£804.03 vs £681.04, respectively), while the 2 other studies reported the converse (£145 vs £162, respectively) and all costs (£116.87 vs £240.28 respectively). Within the three studies, the odds of healing were statistically significantly greater with 4 layer bandaging (OR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.54-3.15; p = 0.001).; 2.4 layer compression versus other compression (6 studies). For the three studies reporting the mean costs per patient associated with treatment (bandages alone), over the treatment period, analysis identified a mean difference (MD) in costs for 4 layer vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) of -41.60 (95% CI: 91.40 to 8.20; p = 0.10). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85; p = 0.004). For 4 layer vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD is: 14.00 (95% CI: 53.66 to -25.66; p < 0.49). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) is: 3.26 (95% CI: 2.54-4.18; p < 0.00001). For comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD in costs is: 55.60 (95% CI: 95.26 to -15.94; p = 0.006). The OR of healing with Comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 5.03 (95% CI:4.10-6.17; p < 0.00001). Three studies presented the mean annual costs per patient associated with treatment (all costs). The MD is 172 (150-194; p = 0.401), indicating no statistically significant difference in costs between the groups. All studies showed faster healing rates in the 4 layer study groups. 3. Compression wrap versus inelastic bandage (one study). Compression wrap was less expensive than inelastic bandage (£201 vs £335, respectively) with more wounds healing in the compression wrap group (78.8%, n = 26/33; 69.7%, n = 23/33). Conclusion: The results for the analysis of costs varied across the included studies. As with the primary outcome, the results indicated that the costs of compression therapy are inconsistent. Given the methodological heterogeneity among studies, future studies in this area are needed and these should use specific methodological guidelines to generate high-quality health economic studies.