Table 2.
Comparison of 20‐week costs for NPWT and two scenarios of wet‐to‐moist therapy with differing numbers of nursing visits per day
| Cost | NPWT group | Control group (wet‐to‐moist therapy) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| One nursing visit/day | Two nursing visits/day | ||
| Weekly nursing cost ($) | 336 | 784 | 1568 |
| Number of visits/week | 3 | 7 | 14 |
| Cost/visit* ($) | 112 | 112 | 112 |
| Weekly physician cost ($) | 33 | 33 | 33 |
| Number of visits/week | 0·5 | 0·5 | 0·5 |
| Cost/visit ($) | 66 | 66 | 66 |
| Weekly treatment cost ($) | 749 | 74 | 74 |
| Applications/week | 7 | 21 | 21 |
| Cost/application ($) | 107 | 3·50 | 3·50 |
| Total weekly cost ($) | 1118 | 891 | 1675 |
| 20‐week expected cost† ($) | 16 733 | 15 258 | 28 691 |
NPWT, negative pressure wound therapy.
Cost/visit is based on $112/visit, as reported by Ovington 31, 32, and adjusted by ∼4% per annum for 3 years to account for inflation. Such a fee‐for‐service reimbursement is only true for some private payors, but payment reflects cost‐to‐system for a nursing visit and is therefore relevant to a Medicare setting as well.
Incorporates therapy outcomes as well as direct equipment/medical personnel costs (see text for method of calculation).