The quality-adjusted life year (QALY) is routinely used as a summary measure of health outcome for economic evaluation, which incorporates the impact on both the quantity and quality of life. Key studies relating to the QALY and utility measurement are the sources of data. Areas of agreement include the need for a standard measure of health outcome to enable comparisons across different disease areas and populations, and the methods used for valuing health states in utility measurement. Areas of controversy include the limitation of the QALY approach in terms of the health benefits it can capture, its blindness towards equity concerns, the underlying theoretical assumptions and the most appropriate generic preference-based measure of utility. There is growing debate relating to whether a QALY is the same regardless of who accrues it, and also the issue as to who should value health states. Research is required to further enhance the QALY approach to deal with challenges relating to equity-weighted utility maximization and testing the validity of underlying assumptions. Issues around choosing between condition-specific measures and generic instruments also merit further investigation.

Mapping continues to be an important area of research for economic evaluation, in particular validation of mapping functions.

Pressure ulcers are associated with a significant economic burden that, in many cases, is recognised as being avoidable. The effectiveness of pressure relieving surfaces is well documented and acknowledged in clinical guidelines on the prevention and management of pressure ulcers. Whilst pressure relieving surfaces are more expensive than traditional hospital mattresses, judicious use, targeted to patients most at risk, can help to reduce the incidence and costs of pressure ulcers in hospital settings. This review paper includes a summary of pivotal clinical evidence on pressure relieving surfaces as well as a suggested approach for modelling their financial impact on hospital budgets. Simple financial modelling suggests that pressure relieving surfaces could lead to financial savings for a hospital when used appropriately.

The objective of the study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of Vacuum Assisted Closure® (V.A.C.®) Therapy compared with advanced wound care (AWC) for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in France. A cost-effectiveness model intended to reflect the management of DFUs was updated for the French setting. The Markov model follows the progression of 1000 hypothetical patients over a 1-year period. The model was populated with French-specific data, obtained from published sources and clinical experts. The analysis evaluated costs and health outcomes, in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), wounds healed and amputations, from the perspective of the payer. The patients treated with V.A.C.® Therapy experienced more QALYs (0.787 versus 0.784) and improved healing rates (50.2% versus 48.5%) at a lower total cost of care (€24,881 versus €28,855 per patient per year) when compared with AWC. Sensitivity analyses conducted around key model parameters indicated that the results were affected by hospital resource use and costs. DFU treatment using V.A.C.® Therapy in France was associated with lower costs, additional QALYs, more healed ulcers and fewer amputations than treatment with AWC. V.A.C.® Therapy was therefore found to be the dominant treatment option.