Funding sourcesThe Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE) funded and sponsored the trial via the KCE Trials Programme (study ID KCE16012), a national public funding programme of noncommercial trials. No funding from the manufacturers of the study devices was received. Involvement of the sponsor included refinement of the study design and statistical analyses but they were not involved in data collection. KCE members reviewed the manuscript for statistical correctness and interpretation. The corresponding author had the final responsibility for the decision to publish.

The objective was to systematically review monetary data related to management of incontinence‐associated dermatitis (IAD) in an adult population. Six electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and EconLit. The search string combined index terms and text words related to IAD and monetary data. The quality of the articles was assessed using the consensus on Health Economic Criteria. Results were synthesised narratively because of methodological heterogeneity. Nine studies were included. Only direct medical costs were reported. The product cost per application for prevention ranged between $0.05 and $0.52, and for treatment between $0.20 and $0.35. The product cost per patient/day for prevention ranged between $0.23 and $20.17. The product cost of IAD prevention and treatment per patient/day ranged between $0.57 and $1.08. The cost to treat IAD did not consider the treatment of secondary infection. The calculation of labour cost and total cost differed considerably between studies. Summarising monetary data is a challenge because of heterogeneity in currencies, settings, samples, time horizons, health‐ and cost outcome valuation, IAD definition and measurements, and included costs. Procedures for health economic evaluations are to be clarified to guarantee valid interpretation and comparison with other studies.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to define the user profile, (technical) criteria, conditions, and potential benefits of the integration of sensor technology in disposable body-worn incontinence materials. DESIGN: Qualitative study using a framework method. SUBJECT AND SETTING: The sample included residents with incontinence, nurses, and decision-makers in a selection of Flemish nursing homes (Belgium). METHODS: Semistructured interviews were performed between June and August 2020. The interviews with nurses included open-ended questions focusing on the user profile, (technical) criteria, conditions, and potential benefits of the integration of sensor technology in disposable body-worn incontinence materials. The interviews with decision-makers were supplemented with questions about purchase cost and other economic criteria (such as reimbursement). Interviews with residents included questions about wearing comfort. Interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed using a framework method. RESULTS: The user profile was defined as (1) residents with cognitive impairment and (2) residents who are bedridden or are severely limited in mobility. The following (technical) criteria emerged from the analyses: a small, thin, and oval/circular sensor, an adaptable or in front attachment of the sensor on the absorbent product, a real-time indication of the absorbent product's saturation, leakage detection, liquid stool detection, the automatic recording of incontinence-related data, a durable sensor easy to disinfect, and receiving notifications on a wearable device. Conditions included a stable connection between the wearable device and the sensor, accurate measurements, user-friendly system, comprehensible training, affordability, and data protection. Potential benefits included workload reduction, increased comfort for residents and staff, more person-centered care, increased quality of care, less skin damage and economic (eg, less costs due to less excessive absorbent product changes), and/or environmental (e.g. less waste) gains. CONCLUSION: Study findings identified the user profile, (technical) criteria, conditions, and potential benefits of the integration of sensor technology in disposable body-worn incontinence materials. Respondents reported problems with changing routines and skepticism about the sensor's accuracy. Based on findings from this study, we recommend involving representatives of all relevant stakeholders in the design of sensor technology to ensure users' needs and increase the use of sensor technology. Comprehensive education is recommended to inform nurses, residents, and their family members on the importance and benefits of the technology and to aid overcoming barriers to use (skepticism, resistance to new technologies, and changing care routines). Study findings also indicate that the sensor technology cannot replace the existing voiding programs; rather it should be an addition to routine continence care.