To freeze or not to freeze: a cost-effectiveness analysis of wart treatment

Summary Background  Several general practitioner (GP)‐prescribed and over‐the‐counter therapies for warts and verrucae are available. However, the cost‐effectiveness of these treatments is unknown. Objectives  To compare the cost‐effectiveness of different treatments for cutaneous warts. Methods  We...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBritish journal of dermatology (1951) Vol. 156; no. 4; pp. 687 - 692
Main Authors Keogh-Brown, M.R., Fordham, R.J., Thomas, K.S., Bachmann, M.O., Holland, R.C., Avery, A.J., Armstrong, S.J., Chalmers, J.R., Howe, A., Rodgers, S., Williams, H.C., Harvey, I.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.04.2007
Blackwell
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Summary Background  Several general practitioner (GP)‐prescribed and over‐the‐counter therapies for warts and verrucae are available. However, the cost‐effectiveness of these treatments is unknown. Objectives  To compare the cost‐effectiveness of different treatments for cutaneous warts. Methods  We designed a decision‐analytic Markov simulation model based on systematic review evidence to estimate the cost‐effectiveness of various treatments. The outcome measures studied are percentage of patients cured, cost of treatment and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio for each treatment, compared with no treatment, after 18 weeks. Results  Duct tape was most cost‐effective but published evidence of its effectiveness is sparse. Salicylic acid was the most cost‐effective over‐the‐counter treatment commonly used. Cryotherapy administered by a GP was less cost‐effective than GP‐prescribed salicylic acid and less cost‐effective than cryotherapy administered by a nurse. Conclusions  Duct tape could be adopted as the primary treatment for cutaneous warts if its effectiveness is verified by further rigorous trials. Nurse‐administered cryotherapy is likely to be more cost‐effective than GP‐administered cryotherapy.
Bibliography:istex:76773561048ECA4B0A3FC89A30CAB365D4C679AA
ark:/67375/WNG-2P29KS1H-J
ArticleID:BJD7768
Conflicts of interest
None declared.
This work was carried out in Norwich, U.K. and Nottingham, U.K. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Health.
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-4
ObjectType-Undefined-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-2
ObjectType-Article-3
ISSN:0007-0963
1365-2133
DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.07768.x