TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of a Ceramide-Infused Skin Barrier Versus a Standard Barrier

T2 - Findings From a Long-Term Cost-effectiveness Analysis

AU - Berger, Ariel

AU - Inglese, Gary

AU - Skountrianos, George

AU - Karlsmark, Tonny

AU - Oguz, Mustafa

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a ceramide-infused skin barrier (CIB) versus other skin barriers (standard of care) among patients who have undergone ostomy creation.DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis, based on a decision-analytic model that was estimated using data from the ADVOCATE (A Study Determining Variances in Ostomy Skin Conditions And The Economic Impact) trial, which investigated stoma-related healthcare costs over 12 weeks among patients who recently underwent fecal ostomy, and from other sources.SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Analysis was based on a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients who recently underwent fecal ostomy; over a 1-year period, 500 patients were assumed to use CIB and 500 were assumed to use standard of care.METHODS: We adapted a previous economic model to estimate expected 1-year costs and outcomes among persons with a new ostomy assumed to use CIB versus standard of care. Outcomes of interest included peristomal skin complications (PSCs) (up to 2 during the 1-year period of interest) and quality-adjusted life days (QALDs); QALDs vary from 1, indicating a day of perfect health to 0, indicating a day with the lowest possible health (deceased). Subjects were assigned QALDs on a daily basis, with the value of the QALD on any given day based on whether the patient was experiencing a PSC. Costs included those related to skin barriers, ostomy accessories, and care of PSCs. The incremental cost-effectiveness of CIB versus standard of care was estimated as the incremental cost per PSC averted and QALD gained, respectively; net monetary benefit of CIB was also estimated. All analyses were run using the perspective of an Australian payer.RESULTS: On a per-patient basis, use of CIB was expected over a 1-year period to result in 0.16 fewer PSCs, an additional 0.35 QALDs, and a savings of A$180 (Australian dollars, US $137) in healthcare costs all versus standard of care. Management with CIB provided a net monetary benefit (calculated as the product of maximum willingness to pay for 1 QALD times additional QALDs with CIB less the incremental cost of CIB) of A$228 (US $174). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also completed; it revealed that 97% of model runs resulted in fewer expected PSCs with CIB; 92% of these runs resulted in lower expected costs with CIB.CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that the CIB is a cost-effective skin barrier for persons living with an ostomy.

AB - PURPOSE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a ceramide-infused skin barrier (CIB) versus other skin barriers (standard of care) among patients who have undergone ostomy creation.DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis, based on a decision-analytic model that was estimated using data from the ADVOCATE (A Study Determining Variances in Ostomy Skin Conditions And The Economic Impact) trial, which investigated stoma-related healthcare costs over 12 weeks among patients who recently underwent fecal ostomy, and from other sources.SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Analysis was based on a hypothetical cohort of 1000 patients who recently underwent fecal ostomy; over a 1-year period, 500 patients were assumed to use CIB and 500 were assumed to use standard of care.METHODS: We adapted a previous economic model to estimate expected 1-year costs and outcomes among persons with a new ostomy assumed to use CIB versus standard of care. Outcomes of interest included peristomal skin complications (PSCs) (up to 2 during the 1-year period of interest) and quality-adjusted life days (QALDs); QALDs vary from 1, indicating a day of perfect health to 0, indicating a day with the lowest possible health (deceased). Subjects were assigned QALDs on a daily basis, with the value of the QALD on any given day based on whether the patient was experiencing a PSC. Costs included those related to skin barriers, ostomy accessories, and care of PSCs. The incremental cost-effectiveness of CIB versus standard of care was estimated as the incremental cost per PSC averted and QALD gained, respectively; net monetary benefit of CIB was also estimated. All analyses were run using the perspective of an Australian payer.RESULTS: On a per-patient basis, use of CIB was expected over a 1-year period to result in 0.16 fewer PSCs, an additional 0.35 QALDs, and a savings of A$180 (Australian dollars, US $137) in healthcare costs all versus standard of care. Management with CIB provided a net monetary benefit (calculated as the product of maximum willingness to pay for 1 QALD times additional QALDs with CIB less the incremental cost of CIB) of A$228 (US $174). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was also completed; it revealed that 97% of model runs resulted in fewer expected PSCs with CIB; 92% of these runs resulted in lower expected costs with CIB.CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that the CIB is a cost-effective skin barrier for persons living with an ostomy.

KW - Australia

KW - Ceramides/economics

KW - Cost-Benefit Analysis

KW - Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data

KW - Humans

KW - Quality of Life/psychology

KW - Skin Cream/economics

KW - Surgical Stomas/adverse effects

U2 - 10.1097/WON.0000000000000416

DO - 10.1097/WON.0000000000000416

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29438140

VL - 45

SP - 146

EP - 155

JO - Journal of Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nursing

JF - Journal of Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nursing

SN - 1071-5754

IS - 2

ER -