Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Cost-effectiveness of nursing interventions for diabetic foot ulcer management: systematic review

Costo-efectividad de las intervenciones de enfermería para el manejo de úlceras por pie diabético: revisión sistemática

dc.creatorVásquez-Hernández, Skarlet Marcell
dc.creatorRico-Ardila, Dayana Lizeth
dc.creatorGómez-Camargo, Lesly Nathali
dc.creatorÁlvarez-Quintero, Lynda María
dc.date2021-04-23
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-03T21:03:12Z
dc.date.available2022-03-03T21:03:12Z
dc.identifierhttps://revistas.unab.edu.co/index.php/medunab/article/view/3832
dc.identifier10.29375/01237047.3832
dc.identifier.urihttp://test.repositoriodigital.com:8080/handle/123456789/16500
dc.descriptionIntroduction Nursing interventions used for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers include traditional and advanced healing techniques. Often their choice depends on the nurse's personal judgment, rather than recognition of cost-effectiveness. The objective of this study is to identify the most cost-effective nursing interventions for the management of patients with diabetic foot ulcers. Methodology. A systematic review was conducted at Pubmed, Cochrane and the Virtual Health Library. Randomized and non-randomized studies of any nursing intervention used for diabetic foot ulcer management with reported cost-effectiveness were included. The selection of eligible articles was made by two independent reviewers. The risk of bias was assessed using the following guidelines: Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Results. Six of the eight included articles were classified at high risk of bias. The two interventions in which a better cost-effectiveness ratio was evidenced compared to the control group were the use of Beta-Glucan gel (compared to placebo) and negative pressure wound therapy (compared to advanced wet wound therapy). Discussion. National and international guidelines for the nursing management of diabetic foot ulcers propose at least 15 different interventions. However, the limited availability of high-quality cost-effectiveness studies makes selection difficult and generates greater variability in nursing practices. Conclusion. Cost-effectiveness studies with direct comparisons of nursing interventions for diabetic foot ulcer management are needed.en-US
dc.descriptionIntroducción. Las intervenciones de enfermería usadas para el tratamiento de las úlceras por pie diabético incluyen técnicas de cura tradicionales y avanzadas. Frecuentemente su elección depende del criterio personal de la enfermera, en lugar del reconocimiento de la relación costo-efectividad. El objetivo de este estudio es identificar las intervenciones de enfermería de mayor costo-efectividad para el manejo de pacientes con úlceras por pie diabético. Metodología. Se realizó una revisión sistemática en Pubmed, Cochrane y la Biblioteca Virtual De La Salud. Se incluyeron estudios aleatorizados y no aleatorizados de cualquier intervención de enfermería usada para el manejo de úlcera por pie diabético con reporte de costo-efectividad. La selección de los artículos elegibles fue realizada por dos evaluadores independientes. El riesgo de sesgos fue evaluado con las guías Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Resultados. Seis de los ocho artículos incluidos fueron clasificados con alto riesgo de sesgos. Las dos intervenciones en las que se evidenció una mejor relación costo-efectividad en comparación con el grupo control fueron el uso de Beta-Glucan gel (comparado con placebo) y la terapia de presión negativa (comparada con terapia de herida húmeda avanzada). Discusión. Guías nacionales e internacionales para el manejo de enfermería de úlceras por pie diabético proponen al menos 15 diferentes intervenciones. Sin embargo, la escasa disponibilidad de estudios de alta calidad sobre la relación costo-efectividad dificulta la selección y genera mayor variabilidad en las prácticas de enfermería. Conclusión. Es necesario realizar estudios de la relación costo-efectividad con comparaciones directas de las intervenciones de enfermería para el manejo de úlceras por pie diabético.es-ES
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.formattext/xml
dc.languagespa
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherUNABes-ES
dc.relationhttps://revistas.unab.edu.co/index.php/medunab/article/view/3832/3391
dc.relationhttps://revistas.unab.edu.co/index.php/medunab/article/view/3832/3392
dc.relationhttps://revistas.unab.edu.co/index.php/medunab/article/view/3832/3410
dc.relation/*ref*/Referencias 1. GBD 2016 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017; 390(10100):1211-1259. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32154-2 2. GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex-specific mortality for 282 causes of death in 195 countries and territories, 1980-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32203-7 3. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. Global Health Data Exchange [Internet]. GBD results tool; 2020 [citado 10 de septiembre de 2020]. Recuperado a partir de: http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool 4. Vargas-Uricoechea H and Casas-Figueroa LÁ. An Epidemiologic Analysis of Diabetes in Colombia. Annals of Global Health. 2016; 81(6), pp.742-753. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aogh.2015.11.001 5. Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, Sarwar N, Gao P, Seshasai SR, Gobin R, Kaptoge S, et al. Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies. Lancet. 2010; 375(9733):2215-22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60484-9 6. Peters SA, Huxley RR, Woodward M. Diabetes as a risk factor for stroke in women compared with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 64 cohorts, including 775,385 individuals and 12,539 strokes. Lancet. 2014; 383(9933):1973-80. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60040-4 7. Seferovic JP, Bentley-Lewis R, Claggett B, Diaz R, Gerstein HC, Køber LV, et al. Retinopathy, Neuropathy, and Subsequent Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome in the ELIXA: The Importance of Disease Duration. J Diabetes Res. 2018. 1631263. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1631263 8. Saed L, Deihim Z, Naghshbandi MK, Rajabnia M, Naleini SN. Cardiovascular events in patients with over 10 years history of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019; 13(1):68-72. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2018.08.026 9. Kastarinen M., Juutilainen A., Kastarinen H., Salomaa V., Karhapaa P., Tuomilehto J., et al. Risk factors for end-stage renal disease in a community based population: 26-year follow-up of 25,821 men and women in eastern Finland. J. Intern. Med. 2010; 267(6): 612-620. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2009.02197.x 10. Shen Y, Cai R, Sun J, Dong X, Huang R, Tian S, Wang S. Diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for incident chronic kidney disease and end-stage renal disease in women compared with men: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endocrine. 2017; 55(1):66-76. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-016-1014-6 11. Vrsalovic M, Vucur K, Vrsalovic Presecki A, Fabijanic D, Milosevic M. Impact of diabetes on mortality in peripheral artery disease: a meta-analysis. Clin Cardiol. 2017; 40(5):287-291. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.22657 12. Blanes JI., Lluch I., Morillas C., Nogueira JM., Hernández A. Capítulo 3 Etiopatogenia del pie diabético. En: J. Marinel.lo Roura, Coordinador. Tratado del pie diabético. España: Jarpyo Editores; 2002. p33- 41. 13. University of Salford Manchester. Limbless statistics. United Kingdom. 2005. Citado 3 nov 2018. Recuperado a partir de: http://www.limbless-statistics.org/ 14. Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, Travison TG, Brookmeyer R. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2008;89(3):422-429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005 15. Font-Jiménez I, Llaurado-Serra M, Roig-Garcia M, De Los Mozos-Perez B, Acebedo-Urdiales S. Retrospective study of the evolution of the incidence of non-traumatic lower-extremity amputations (2007-2013) and risk factors of reamputation. Prim Care Diabetes. 2016;10(6):434-441. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcd.2016.04.001 16. Vaidya V, Gangan N, Sheehan J. Impact of cardiovascular complications among patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2015;15(3):487-497. doi: https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2015.1024661 17. Kerr M, Barron E, Chadwick P, et al. The cost of diabetic foot ulcers and amputations to the National Health Service in England. Diabet Med. 2019;36(8):995-1002. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13973 18. International Diabetes Federation. Atlas de la Diabetes. Séptima Edición. 2015. Citado 3 nov 2018. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.fundaciondiabetes.org/upload/publicaciones_ficheros/95/IDF_Atlas_2015_SP_WEB_oct2016.pdf 19. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Informe mundial sobre la diabetes. 2016. Citado 3 nov 2018. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.who.int/diabetes/global-report/es/) 20. Barcelo A, Arredondo A, Gordillo-Tobar A, Segovia J, Qiang A. The cost of diabetes in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2015: Evidence for decision and policy makers. J Glob Health. 2017;7(2):020410. doi: https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.07.020410 21. Hicks CW, Selvarajah S, Mathioudakis N, et al. Trends and determinants of costs associated with the inpatient care of diabetic foot ulcers. J Vasc Surg. 2014;60(5):1247-1254.e2. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.009 22. González J, Walker J, Einarson T. Cost-of-illness study of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Colombia. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2009;26(1):55-63. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.scielosp.org/article/rpsp/2009.v26n1/55-63/ doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1020-49892009000700009 23. Méndez FA, Rivero WM. Costos médicos directos de complicación en el tratamiento en pacientes con diabetes mellitus en Colombia 2016 [tesis en Internet]. [Bogotá]: Universidad de Ciencias aplicadas y ambientales; 2016. [Citado 3 nov 2018. Recuperado a partir de: https://repository.udca.edu.co/bitstream/11158/859/1/TESIS%20PARA%20IMPRESION%20FINAL.pdf 24. Rice JB, Desai U, Cummings AK, Birnbaum HG, Skornicki M, Parsons NB. Burden of diabetic foot ulcers for medicare and private insurers [published correction appears in Diabetes Care. 2014 Sep;37(9):2660]. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(3):651-658. doi: https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-2176 25. Torra J. Economía de la Salud del Pie Diabético: Una revisión integrativa. En: 2ª Cumbre de las Americas del Pie Diabético; 2017 Oct 12. Ciudad de México. Citado 10 sep 2020. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321151845_Economia_de_la_Salud_del_Pie_Diabetico_Una_revision_integrativa-_Diabetic_Foot_Health_Economics_An_integrative_review_Presentation_in_Spanish 26. Wang C, Guo M, Zhang N, Wang G. Effectiveness of honey dressing in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2019;34:123-131. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2018.09.004 27. Everett E, Mathioudakis N. Update on management of diabetic foot ulcers. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018;1411(1):153-165. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13569 28. Martí-Carvajal AJ, Gluud C, Nicola S, Simancas-Racines D, Reveiz L, Oliva P, Cedeño-Taborda J. Growth factors for treating diabetic foot ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(10):CD008548. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008548.pub2 29. Saco M, Howe N, Nathoo R, Cherpelis B. Comparing the efficacies of alginate, foam, hydrocolloid, hydrofiber, and hydrogel dressings in the management of diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining how to dress for success. Dermatol Online J. 2016;22(8). pii: 13030/qt7ph5v17z. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307566354_Comparing_the_efficacies_of_alginate_foam_hydrocolloid_hydrofiber_and_hydrogel_dressings_in_the_management_of_diabetic_foot_ulcers_and_venous_leg_ulcers_A_systematic_review_and_meta-analysis_examining 30. O'Meara S, Cullum N, Majid M, Sheldon T. Systematic reviews of wound care management: (3) antimicrobial agents for chronic wounds; (4) diabetic foot ulceration. Health Technol Assess. 2000; 4(21):1-237. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta/hta4210 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3310/hta4210 31. Snyder RJ, Hanft JR. Diabetic foot ulcers--effects on QOL, costs, and mortality and the role of standard wound care and advanced-care therapies. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2009 Nov 1;55(11):28-38. Recuperado a partir de: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Diabetic-Foot-Ulcers%3A-The-Importance-of-Patient-and-Jagadish-McNally/69658d1af9aa37c72b38cc661ad7bc2c2d9d6b50 32. Cutting KF. The cost-effectiveness of a novel soluble beta-glucan gel. J Wound Care. 2017;26(5):228-234. doi: https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.5.228 33. Driver VR, Blume PA. Evaluation of wound care and health-care use costs in patients with diabetic foot ulcers treated with negative pressure wound therapy versus advanced moist wound therapy. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2014; 104(2):147-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.7547/0003-0538-104.2.147 34. Waycaster CR, Gilligan AM, Motley TA. Cost-Effectiveness of Becaplermin Gel on Diabetic Foot Ulcer Healing. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2016;106(4):273-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.7547/15-004
dc.relation/*ref*/Zelen CM, Orgill DP, Serena T, Galiano R, Carter MJ, DiDomenico LA, et al. A prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre clinical trial examining healing rates, safetyand cost to closure of an acellular reticular allogenic human dermis versus standard of care in the treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2017;14(2):307-315. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12600 36. Gilligan AM, Waycaster CR, Landsman AL. Wound closure in patients with DFU: a cost-effectiveness analysis of two cellular/tissue-derived products. J Wound Care. 2015;24(3):149-56. doi: https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2015.24.3.149 37. Gilligan AM, Waycaster CR, Motley TA. Cost-effectiveness of becaplermin gel on wound healing of diabetic foot ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2015;23(3):353-60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12285 38. Rice JB, Desai U, Ristovska L, Cummings AK, Birnbaum HG, Skornicki M, et al. Economic outcomes among Medicare patients receiving bioengineered cellular technologies for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. J Med Econ. 2015; 18(8):586-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.3111/13696998.2015.1031793 39. Wilasrusmee C, Marjareonrungrung M, Eamkong S, Attia J, Poprom N, Jirasisrithum S, et al. Maggot therapy for chronic ulcer: a retrospective cohort and a meta-analysis. Asian J Surg. 2014;37(3):138-47. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2013.09.005 40. Aalaa M, Malazy OT, Sanjari M, Peimani M, Mohajeri-Tehrani M. Nurses' role in diabetic foot prevention and care; a review. J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2012;11(1):24. Published 2012 Nov 21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/2251-6581-11-24 41. Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario. Valoración y manejo de las úlceras de pie diabético. En: Grispun D, Director. Guías de buenas prácticas clínicas. Canadá; 2013. p1- 162. Recuperado a partir de: https://rnao.ca/sites/rnao-ca/files/2015_-_BPG_Foot_16_01_2015_-_2nd_Edition.pdf 42. COLPEDIS. Grupo Colombiano de Pie Diabético. Guías Colombianas para la prevención, diagnóstico y tratamiento del pie diabético. Tercera edición. 2019; 1- 63. Recuperado a partir de: https://es.scribd.com/document/411231925/Guias-Colombianas-Para-La-Prevencion-Diagnostico-y-Tratamiento-Del-Pie-Diabetico-Un-Manejo-Integral-2019 43. Parker CN, Van Netten JJ, Parker TJ, et al. Differences between national and international guidelines for the management of diabetic foot disease. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2019;35(2):e3101. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3101 44. Beuscher T. Guidelines for Diabetic Foot Care. A Template for the Care of All Feet. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2019;46(3):241-245. Recuperado a partir de: https://nursing.ceconnection.com/ovidfiles/00152192-201905000-00014.pdf;jsessionid=D90236391B51E13CF4AA937282AC0F13 doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0000000000000532 45. Schaper NC, van Netten JJ, Apelqvist J, et al. Practical Guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020;36 Suppl 1:e3266. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3266 46. Asociación latinoamericana de diabetes. Guías ALAD sobre el Diagnóstico, Control y Tratamiento de la Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 con Medicina Basada en Evidencia Edición 2019. 2019. Revista de la ALAD. Recuperado a partir de: http://www.revistaalad.com/guias/5600AX191_guias_alad_2019.pdf
dc.rightsDerechos de autor 2021 MedUNABes-ES
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0es-ES
dc.sourceMedUNAB; Vol. 24 No. 1 (2021): april - july, 2021: Diabetic Foot, Substance-related disorders, Medical Education ; 13-40en-US
dc.sourceMedUNAB; Vol. 24 Núm. 1 (2021): abril - julio, 2021: Pie Diabético, Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias, Educación Médica; 13-40es-ES
dc.source2382-4603
dc.source0123-7047
dc.subjectDiabetic Footen-US
dc.subjectPatient care managementen-US
dc.subjectLeg ulcersen-US
dc.subjectEfficacyen-US
dc.subjectCost-Benefit Analysisen-US
dc.subjectPie Diabéticoes-ES
dc.subjectManejo de Atención al Pacientees-ES
dc.subjectÚlcera del Piees-ES
dc.subjectEficaciaes-ES
dc.subjectAnálisis Costo-Beneficioes-ES
dc.titleCost-effectiveness of nursing interventions for diabetic foot ulcer management: systematic reviewen-US
dc.titleCosto-efectividad de las intervenciones de enfermería para el manejo de úlceras por pie diabético: revisión sistemáticaes-ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem