The cost of pressure ulcers in the United Kingdom

TLDR

Pressure ulcer costs are expected to rise as the population ages without concerted effort. The study aims to estimate UK pressure ulcer treatment costs at 2011 prices to highlight prevention importance and provide a basis for cost‑effectiveness assessment of prevention measures. A bottom‑up methodology using daily resource requirements of best‑practice care protocols and UK health‑care prices estimated treatment costs per episode and per patient across ulcer severities and complications. Treatment costs range from £1,214 for category 1 to £14,108 for category IV, increasing with severity due to longer healing times and higher complication rates, underscoring a significant burden on patients and providers. Heron Evidence Development Ltd.

Abstract

Objective: To provide an estimate of the costs of treating pressure ulcers in the UK at August 2011 prices, as a means of highlighting the importance of pressure ulcer prevention. Method: Resource use was derived from a bottom-up methodology, based on the daily resources required to deliver protocols of care reflecting good clinical practice, with prices reflecting costs to the health and social care system in the UK. This approach was used to estimate treatment costs per episode of care and per patient for ulcers of different severity and level of complications. Results: The cost of treating a pressure ulcer varies from £1214 (category 1) to £14 108 (category IV). Costs increase with ulcer severity because the time to heal is longer and the incidence of complications is higher in more severe cases. Conclusion: Pressure ulcers represent a significant cost burden in the UK, both to patients and to health-care providers. Without concerted effort, this cost is likely to increase in the future as the population ages. The estimates reported here provide a basis for assessment of the cost-effectiveness of measures to reduce the incidence of hospital-acquired ulcers. Declaration of interest: Heron evidence Development ltd. was funded for this work by Mölnlycke Health Care (UK). The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.