Search Results
You are looking at 11 - 12 of 12 items for
- Author or Editor: Matthew G. Garoufalis x
- Refine by access: All Content x
Background:
Biochemical properties of the amniotic membrane help modulate inflammation and enhance soft-tissue healing. In controlled trials, the efficacy of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (dHACM) allografts has been established. Our purpose is to describe our experience with using dHACM to treat nonhealing wounds of various etiologies.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective review of deidentified data from 117 consecutive patients treated in an outpatient clinic with dHACM allografts with wounds of various etiologies over 2 years. The decision to use advanced wound-care treatments is based on rate of healing observed after initiation of standard wound care and patient risk factors. Eligibility for treatments such as amniotic membrane allografts includes wounds without 50% reduction after 4 weeks, or earlier in patients deemed to be at high risk for nonhealing or with a history of chronic wounds. In micronized or sheet formulation, dHACM is applied to the wound weekly after sharp/mechanical debridement as necessary, and wound-care practices appropriate for wound type and location are continued.
Results:
Thirty-four percent of allograft recipients had diabetic foot ulcers, 25% had venous leg ulcers, 20% had surgical wounds, 14% had pressure ulcers, 6% had ischemic wounds, and 2% had traumatic wounds. Complete healing occurred in 91.1% of treated patients, with a mean ± SD number of weekly applications per healed wound of 5.1 ± 4.2.
Conclusions:
In addition to wounds of diabetic origin, dHACM can significantly expedite healing in refractory wounds of varying etiologies.
Background: We sought to examine the economic value of specialized lower-extremity medical care by podiatric physicians in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers by evaluating cost outcomes for patients with diabetic foot ulcer who did and did not receive care from a podiatric physician in the year before the onset of a foot ulcer.
Methods: We analyzed the economic value among commercially insured patients and Medicare-eligible patients with employer-sponsored supplemental medical benefits using the MarketScan Databases. The analysis consisted of two parts. In part I, we examined cost or savings per patient associated with care by podiatric physicians using propensity score matching and regression techniques; in part II, we extrapolated cost or savings to populations.
Results: Matched and regression-adjusted results indicated that patients who visited a podiatric physician had $13,474 lower costs in commercial plans and $3,624 lower costs in Medicare plans during 2-year follow-up (P < .01 for both). A positive net present value of increasing the share of patients at risk for diabetic foot ulcer by 1% was found, with a range of $1.2 to $17.7 million for employer-sponsored plans and $1.0 to $12.7 million for Medicare plans.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that podiatric medical care can reduce the disease and economic burdens of diabetes. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 101(2): 93–115, 2011)
