ArticleInternational wound journal2011
Comparative effectiveness of the SNaP™ Wound Care System.
Article in International wound journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Updates on Recent Clinical Assessment of Commercial Chronic Wound Care Products.Advanced healthcare materials · 2023Review
- The smart negative pressure (SNaP) wound care system: A case series from Singapore.International wound journal · 2019Article
- Design, testing, and scale-up of medical devices for global health: negative pressure wound therapy and non-surgical male circumcision in Rwanda.Globalization and health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetic lower extremity wounds cause substantial burden to healthcare systems, costing tens of thousands of dollars per episode. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) devices have been shown to be cost-effective at treating these wounds, but the traditional devices use bulky electrical pumps that require a durable medical equipment rental-based procurement process. The Spiracur SNaP™ Wound Care System is an ultraportable NPWT system that does not use an electric pump and is fully disposable. It has superior healing compared to standard of care with modern dressings and comparable healing to traditional NPWT devices while giving patients greater mobility and giving clinicians a simpler procurement process. We used a mathematical model to analyse the costs of the SNaP™ system and compare them to standard of care and electrically powered NPWT devices. When compared to standard of care, the SNaP™ system saves over $9000 per wound treated and more than doubles the number of patients healed. The SNaP system has similar healing time to powered NPWT devices, but saves $2300 in Medicare payments or $2800 for private payers per wound treated. Our analysis shows that the SNaP™ system could save substantial treatment costs in addition to allowing patients greater freedom and mobility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.