References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2020. Estimates of diabetes and its burden in the United States. https://tinyurl.com/zryp2sy3 (accessed 17 June 2021)

Yang W, Dall TM, Beronjia K Economic costs of diabetes in the U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care. 2018; 41:(5)917-928 https://doi.org/10.2337/dci18-0007

Nussbaum SR, Carter MJ, Fife CE An economic evaluation of the impact, cost, and medicare policy implications of chronic nonhealing wounds. Value Health. 2018; 21:(1)27-32 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.07.007

Wu S, Armstrong DG. Risk assessment of the diabetic foot and wound. Int Wound J. 2005; 2:(1)17-24 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-4801.2005.00085.x

Rankin TM, Miller JD, Gruessner AC, Nickerson DS. Illustration of cost saving implications of lower extremity nerve decompression to prevent recurrence of diabetic foot ulceration. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015; 9:(4)873-880 https://doi.org/10.1177/1932296815584796

Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Wunderlich RP Risk factors for foot infections in individuals with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006; 29:(6)1288-1293 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc05-2425

Driver VR, de Leon JM. Health economic implications for wound care and limb preservation. J Manag Care Med. 2008; 11:(1)13-19

Bus SA, van Netten JJ. A shift in priority in diabetic foot care and research: 75% of foot ulcers are preventable. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016; 32:195-200 https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.2738

Forsythe RO, Apelqvist J, Boyko EJ Effectiveness of revascularisation of the ulcerated foot in patients with diabetes and peripheral artery disease: A systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020; 36:(S1) https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3279

Faglia E, Clerici G, Clerissi J Long-term prognosis of diabetic patients with critical limb ischemia: a population-based cohort study. Diabetes Care. 2009; 32:(5)822-827 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc08-1223

Pedras S, Carvalho R, Pereira MG. Quality of life in Portuguese patients with diabetic foot ulcer before and after an amputation surgery. Int J Behav Med. 2016; 23:(6)714-721 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-016-9567-6

Department of Health and Human Services. CMS. Update of the Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment System. 2020. https://tinyurl.com/dmn82cvj (accessed 5 July 2021)

Carls GS, Gibson TB, Driver VR The economic value of specialized lower-extremity medical care by podiatric physicians in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2011; 101:(2)93-115 https://doi.org/10.7547/1010093

Snyder D, Sullivan N, Margolis BD, Schoelles K. Skin substitutes for treating chronic wounds. Technology Assessment Program technical brief.: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020

Ovington LG. Hanging wet-to-dry dressings out to dry. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2002; 15:(2)79-84 https://doi.org/10.1097/00129334-200203000-00009

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Glossary (Term: claim). 2021. https://tinyurl.com/3d3cde9u (9accessed 17 June 2021)

Sheehan TP, Gondo GC. Impact of limb loss in the United States. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2014; 25:(1)9-28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmr.2013.09.007

Kruse I, Edelman S. Evaluation and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Clin Diabetes. 2006; 24:(2)91-93 https://doi.org/10.2337/diaclin.24.2.91

Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987; 40:(5)373-383 https://doi.org/10.1016/00219681(87)90171-8

SAS Institute Inc. 9.4 Statements: Reference, 9.4 Statements. https://www.sas.com/en_us/home.html

Dunn OJ. Multiple comparisons among means. J Am Stat Assoc. 1961; 56:(293)52-64 https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1961.10482090

Lim JZ, Ng NS, Thomas C. Prevention and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. J R Soc Med. 2017; 110:(3)104-109 https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076816688346

Armstrong DG, Boulton AJ, Bus SA. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376:(24)2367-2375 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM-ra1615439

Hambleton IR, Jonnalagadda R, Davis CR All-cause mortality after diabetes-related amputation in Barbados: a prospective case-control study. Diabetes Care. 2009; 32:(2)306-307 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc08-1504

Leonard CE, Brensinger CM, Nam YH The quality of Medicaid and Medicare data obtained from CMS and its contractors: implications for pharmacoepidemiology. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017; 17:(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913017-2247-7

Tofthagen C. Threats to validity in retrospective studies. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2012; 3:(3)181-183

Sheehan P, Jones P, Caselli A Percent change in wound area of diabetic foot ulcers over a 4-week period is a robust predictor of complete healing in a 12-week prospective trial. Diabetes Care. 2003; 26:(6)1879-1882 https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.26.6.1879

Rayman G, Vas P, Dhatariya K Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020; 36:(S1) https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3283

Atkin L, Bućko Z, Montero EC Implementing TIMERS: the race against hard-to-heal wounds. J Wound Care. 2019; 28:S1-S50 https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2019.28.Sup3a.S1

Doucette M, Payne KM, Lough W Early advanced therapy for diabetic foot ulcers in high amputation risk veterans: a cohort study. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1534734620928151

Zelen CM, Serena TE, Snyder RJ. A prospective, randomised comparative study of weekly versus biweekly application of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allograft in the management of diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2014; 11:(2)122-128 https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12242

Rice JB, Desai U, Cummings AKE Burden of diabetic foot ulcers for medicare and private insurers. Diabetes Care. 2014; 37:(3)651-658 https://doi.org/10.2337/dc13-2176

Rothenberg GM, Page J, Stuck R Remote temperature monitoring of the diabetic foot: from research to practice. Fed Pract. 2020; 37:(3)114-124

Armstrong DG, Swerdlow MA, Armstrong AA Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer. J Foot Ankle Res. 2020; 13:(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-020-00383-2

Observed impact of skin substitutes in lower extremity diabetic ulcers: lessons from the medicare database (2015–2018)

02 July 2021
19 min read
Volume 5 · Issue 3

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate large propensity-matched cohorts to assess outcomes in patients receiving advanced treatment (AT) with skin substitutes for lower extremity diabetic ulcers (LEDUs) versus no AT (NAT) for the management of LEDUs. Method: The Medicare Limited Dataset (1 October 2015 through 2 October 2018) were used to retrospectively analyse people receiving care for a LEDU treated with AT or NAT (propensity-matched Group 1). Analysis included major and minor amputations, emergency department (ED) visits and hospital readmissions. In addition, AT following parameters for use (FPFU) was compared with AT not FPFU (propensity-matched Group 2). A paired t-test was used for comparisons of the two groups. For comparisons of three groups, the Kruskal–Wallis test was used. A Bonferroni correction was performed when multiple comparisons were calculated.

Results:

There were 9,738,760 patients with a diagnosis of diabetes, of whom 909,813 had a LEDU. In propensity-matched Group 1 (12,676 episodes per cohort), AT patients had statistically fewer minor amputations (p=0.0367), major amputations (p<0.0001), ED visits (p<0.0001), and readmissions (p<0.0001) compared with NAT patients. In propensity-matched Group 2 (1131 episodes per cohort), AT FPFU patients had fewer minor amputations (p=0.002) than those in the AT not FPFU group.

Conclusion:

AT for the management of LEDUs was associated with significant reductions in major and minor amputation, ED use, and hospital readmission compared with LEDUs managed with NAT. Clinics should implement AT in accordance with the highlighted parameters for use to improve outcomes and reduce costs.

In 2018 an estimated 10.5% of the US population was affected by diabetes, including approximately 26.8 million people with a diabetes diagnosis and 7.3 million people who were undiagnosed.1 The total cost of managing people with a diabetes diagnosis in the US was estimated at $327 billion in 2017, $90 billion of which was reduced productivity; all costs continue to rise.2

A particularly concerning aspect of diabetes management is diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), which affects about three million patients annually in the US, and accounts for $0.6–4.5 billion in spending through the Medicare programme, rising to $6–$18.7 billion when infection management is included.3 Total Medicare spending for the treatment of DFUs was estimated to be $6.2–18.7 billion annually in 2014.3

More than half of DFUs develop infection, often with osteomyelitis, and up to 20% of infected DFUs require major or minor amputations.4,5 The longer a DFU remains open, the greater the risk for infection, osteomyelitis and amputation.6 In patients with diabetes, 85% of lower-extremity amputations are preceded by a non-healing DFU, and it is estimated that 49–85% of these amputations may be preventable.7,8

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Wound Central and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for wound care professionals. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Access to clinical or professional articles

  • New content and clinical updates each month