Abstract
Introduction
Diabetic foot infections impose a substantial economic burden globally, particularly in developing countries such as China. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Fufang Huangbai fluid (FHF) compared with Suprasorb® A + Ag antimicrobial calcium alginate wound dressing (SAAAD) for treating grade 1–2 diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) (graded according to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot/the Infectious Diseases Society of America [IWGDF/IDSA]).
Methods
A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using 2 weeks of randomized controlled trial data (n = 176) using Chinese healthcare system costs and service fees. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) served as the primary health outcome, and costs included drug expenses and dressing services. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
Results
Compared with the SAAAD group, the FHF group saved CNY 300.64 and gained an incremental 0.0013 QALYs, making it a dominant approach with a net monetary benefit of CNY 325.86. Sensitivity analysis indicated that the unit price of SAAAD had the greatest impact on the results. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 20 000 per QALY, the probability of FHF being cost-effective was 70.65%.
Conclusion
FHF is economically advantageous compared with SAAAD for the treatment of DFUs of IWGDF/IDSA grade 1–2.