1.1 Evidence supports the case for adopting UrgoStart dressings to treat diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers in the NHS, because they are associated with increased wound healing compared with non-interactive dressings.
1.2 UrgoStart dressings should therefore be considered as an option for people with diabetic foot ulcers or venous leg ulcers after any modifiable factors such as infection have been treated.
1.3 Cost modelling shows that, compared with standard care, using UrgoStart dressings to treat diabetic foot ulcers is associated with a cost saving of £342 per patient after 1 year. It also shows that UrgoStart is likely to be cost saving for treating venous leg ulcers, but the robustness of this conclusion is less certain from the evidence available. For both types of ulcers, potential cost savings mainly come from better healing with UrgoStart dressings. If 25% of people having treatment for diabetic foot ulcers use UrgoStart instead of a non-interactive dressing, the NHS may save up to £5.4 million each year. For more details, see the NICE resource impact report.
1.4 For people with non-venous leg ulcers, there is insufficient evidence to support routine adoption.
Why the committee made these recommendations
UrgoStart is a type of interactive wound dressing. Clinical trial evidence shows that using UrgoStart to treat diabetic foot ulcers increases wound healing compared with non-interactive dressings. For venous leg ulcers, the evidence shows that UrgoStart increases the rate of wound healing in the short term compared with non-interactive dressings when used with standard care, but the impact on complete wound healing is less certain. There is much less evidence for non-venous leg ulcers so, although clinical and patient benefits are plausible, there is no positive recommendation about UrgoStart in this patient group. Cost analyses suggest that using UrgoStart as part of the overall management of diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers could save costs for the NHS.