Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39396902›Full record

Trial reportInternational wound journal2024

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the geko™ device (an NMES technology) in managing venous leg ulcers in UK healthcare settings.

Richard Tuson, Andrew Metry, Keith Harding

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Richard TusonHealth Analytical Solutions Ltd, Macclesfield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6113-3021
Andrew MetryHealth Analytical Solutions Ltd, Macclesfield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7412-6093
Keith HardingHealth Analytical Solutions Ltd, Macclesfield, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0048-3279

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of the geko device a neuromuscular electro-stimulator technology with standard of care (SoC) versus SoC alone for venous leg ulcer (VLU) treatment, from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective over 12 months. Research was conducted across NHS UK facilities, primarily within community services and outpatient leg ulcer clinics, encompassing a total of 51 patients. A partitioned survival model, based on a two-arm randomised controlled trial, assessed wound healing rates using Kaplan-Meier curves and parametric extrapolations over a 12-month time horizon. Costs were derived from UK reference costs the British National Formulary, and the Personal Social Services Research Unit (2021/22). The primary outcome measured was the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. The geko device provides additional benefits by stimulating the lateral popliteal nerve, augmenting venous, arterial, and microvascular flow. The addition of the geko device to SoC significantly enhanced outcomes, increasing healing probability by 68% compared to SoC. This integration would result in a cost saving of £774.14 per patient when compared to the SoC alone across the NHS. Economic analyses indicate that integrating the geko device into SoC protocols would reduce the overall NHS expenditure on VLU wound management by as much as 15%. The approach also positively impacted health-related quality of life. The geko™ device when used adjunctively with SoC would be a cost-effective method for managing chronic VLUs within the NHS, improving healing rates and offering economic benefits.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisVaricose UlcerWound HealingAgedAged, 80 and overCost-Effectiveness AnalysisElectric Stimulation TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsState MedicineUnited Kingdomcost‐effectivenesscost savingNMESvenous leg ulcerswound management

Identifiers

PMID39396902
PMCPMC11471310

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.