Modelling the cost‐effectiveness of a chloramine gel in treating infected, non‐healing diabetic foot ulcers

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims Organic chloramines have been developed as a topical wound bed preparation gel. This study aimed to estimate whether the addition of chloramine gel (Chlorasolv, RLS Global AB, Sweden) to standard care compared with standard care alone would afford a cost‑effective technology to the UK's health services for treating infected, non‐healing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Methods A Markov model was developed to simulate the management of infected, non‐healing DFUs. The model utilised data from a randomised controlled trial and was used to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of chloramine plus standard care compared with standard care alone over a period of 24 weeks, expressed as the incremental cost per quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained at 2021/22 prices. Results Using adjunctive chloramine to treat infected, non‐healing DFUs was found to shorten the time to healing by 36% (from a mean of 17.1 weeks per ulcer to a mean of 11.0 weeks per ulcer). This translated into a 6% improvement in the probability of being healed by 24 weeks and a corresponding 3% improvement in health‐related quality of life (HRQoL). Also, use of adjunctive chloramine was found to reduce the total cost of ulcer management by 13%. Sensitivity analysis found that adjunctive chloramine remained a cost‐effective treatment, even when the value of the model inputs was varied by ±20%. Conclusion Within the limitations of the study, treatment with adjunctive chloramine instead of standard care alone could potentially afford the UK's health services a cost‐effective debridement strategy for infected, non‐healing DFUs, due to its ability to accelerate the time to healing.

Keywords

• chloramine
• chlorasolv
• cost‐effectiveness
• debridement
• diabetic foot ulcer
• UK