Cost-effectiveness of Fufang Huangbai fluid versus Suprasorb® A + Ag antimicrobial calcium alginate wound dressing for treating IWGDF/IDSA grade 1-2 diabetic foot ulcers

Abstract

Introduction Diabetic foot infections impose a substantial economic burden globally, particularly in developing countries such as China. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Fufang Huangbai fluid (FHF) compared with Suprasorb® A + Ag antimicrobial calcium alginate wound dressing (SAAAD) for treating grade 1-2 diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) (graded according to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot/the Infectious Diseases Society of America [IWGDF/IDSA]). Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted using 2 weeks of randomized controlled trial data (n = 176) using Chinese healthcare system costs and service fees. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) served as the primary health outcome, and costs included drug expenses and dressing services. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results Compared with the SAAAD group, the FHF group saved CNY 300.64 and gained an incremental 0.0013 QALYs, making it a dominant approach with a net monetary benefit of CNY 325.86. Sensitivity analysis indicated that the unit price of SAAAD had the greatest impact on the results. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of CNY 20 000 per QALY, the probability of FHF being cost-effective was 70.65%. Conclusion FHF is economically advantageous compared with SAAAD for the treatment of DFUs of IWGDF/IDSA grade 1-2.

Keywords

Fufang Huangbai fluid / diabetic foot ulcer / diabetic foot infection / cost-effectiveness analysis / economics / wound dressing

References

[1] Xu L, Fan WJ, Wang XH, Liu GB.Clinical observation on treatment of diabetic foot ulcer of Wagner grade 1-2 by compound huangbai liquid fomentation. Chin J Exp Tradit Med Form. 2023; 29(6):104-110.

[2] Chinese Society of Endocrinology, China Endocrine and Metabolic Disease Specialist Alliance. Expert consensus on wound treatment of diabetic foot ulcer (2024). Chin J Endocrinol Metab. 2024; 40(7):565-569.

[3] van Netten JJ, Bus SA, Apelqvist J, et al. Definitions and criteria for diabetes-related foot disease (IWGDF 2023 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2024; 40(3):e3654.

[4] GBD 2021 Diabetes Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of diabetes from 1990 to 2021, with projections of prevalence to 2050: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet. 2023; 402(10397):203-234.

[5] Zhou YC, Liu JM, Zhao ZP, Zhou MG, Ng M. The national and provincial prevalence and non-fatal burdens of diabetes in China from 2005 to 2023 with projections of prevalence to 2050. Mil Med Res. 2025; 12(1):28.

[6] McDermott K, Fang M, Boulton AJM, Selvin E, Hicks CW. Etiology, epidemiology, and disparities in the burden of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2023; 46(1):209-221.

[7] Sun H, Saeedi P, Karuranga S, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2022; 183:109119.

[8] IDF diabetes atlas 2021. International Diabetes Federation Web site. https://diabetesatlas.org/atlas/tenth-edition. Accessed August. 12, 2024.

[9] Chinese Diabetes Society, Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases, Chinese Society for Tissue Repair and Regeneration. Chinese guideline on prevention and management of diabetic foot (2019 edition) (Ⅰ). Chin J Diabetes Mellitus. 2019; 11(2):92-108.

[10] Jodheea-Jutton A, Hindocha S, Bhaw-Luximon A. Health economics of diabetic foot ulcer and recent trends to accelerate treatment. Foot. 2022; 52:101909.

[11] Senneville É, Albalawi Z, van Asten SA, et al. IWGDF/IDSA guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes-related foot infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2024; 40(3):e3687.

[12] Hu WW, Lin YT. Alginate/polycaprolactone composite fibers as multifunctional wound dressings. Carbohydr Polym. 2022; 289:119440.

[13] Li J, Wu L, Cai T, Cao Y, Jiang Y. Research progress of Cortex Phellodendri in the chemical constituents and their pharmacological effects. J Pharm Pract. 2018; 36(5):389-391,398.

[14] Wang L, Du X, Zhu HL, Wu P. Review of pharmacological actions of effective components of Phellodendron Chinense. Jiangsu J Tradit Chin Med. 2022; 54(4):77-81.

[15] Shi ZW, Hao JJ, Zhen HX, Zhao HM. Comparative analysis of active constituents of Forsythia suspensa and its antioxidative and antimicrobial properties. Mol Plant Breed. 2023; 21(9):3057-3064.

[16] Liu XY, Sheng DQ. Research progress in the antibacterial effect of active ingredients of Lonicerae japonicae Flos. Anti Infect Pharm. 2023; 20(8):783-789.

[17] Qi JJ, Ma MY, Song SQ. Research progress on antibacterial and antiviral effect and clinical application of dandelion. Shandong Chem Ind. 2022; 51(13):76-79.

[18] Lu J, Deng QP, Ren WH. Mechanism of antimicrobial peptide scolopin 2-NH2 isolated from Scolopendra subspinipes mutilans. Biotechnol Bull. 2018; 34(11):179-190.

[19] Zou LJ, Li BH. Comparison of clinical effect of Fufang Huangbai Ye and povidone-iodine in treatment of diabetic foot infection. Chin J Biochem Pharm. 2016; 36(5):171-173.

[20] Wu YY. Clinical Efficacy of Compound Huangbai Liquid Coating Applied Externally to Diabetic Foot Ulcers [master’s thesis]. Hefei, China: Anhui University of Chinese Medicine; 2025.

[21] Xu B, Wang J, Sun MM, Cao YY. Observation on the efficacy of compound Huangbai liquid solution applied externally to control the infection of multiple drug-resistant bacteria in diabetes foot. Chin J Surg Integr Tradit West Med. 2023; 29(3):293-298,306.

[22] Wang LX, Huang RY, Liu GB.Efficacy of an externally applied agent, compound cortex phellodendri liquid, for the treatment of Wagner grade 2-3 diabetic foot ulcers via combined wet compress therapy and dipping bath and its influence on serum inflammatory factors. J Anhui Univ Chin Med. 2023; 42(1):36-39.

[23] Barbu A, Neamtu B, Zăhan M, Iancu GM, Bacila C, Mireșan V. Current trends in advanced alginate-based wound dressings for chronic wounds. J Pers Med. 2021; 11(9):890.

[24] Umar M, Ullah A, Nawaz H, et al. Wet-spun bi-component alginate based hydrogel fibers: development and in-vitro evaluation as a potential moist wound care dressing. Int J Biol Macromol. 2021; 168:601-610.

[25] Dini G, Cilasun GE, Kuruca SE, Gürarslan A. Fabrication and characterization of silver nanowire-coated porous alginate wet-laid webs for wound dressing applications. Int J Biol Macromol. 2025; 296:139770.

[26] Liu GE. China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations (2020). Beijing, China: China Market Press; 2020: 5-55.

[27] Hou QT, Li Y, Li SY, Tian HM. The global burden of diabetes mellitus. Chin J Diabetes. 2016; 24(1):92-96.

[28] Chinese Diabetes Society, Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases, Chinese Society for Tissue Repair and Regeneration. Chinese guideline on prevention and management of diabetic foot (2019 edition) (Ⅲ). Chin J Diabetes Mellitus. 2019; 11(4):238-247.

[29] Liu GG, Wu HY, Li MH, Gao C, Luo N. Chinese time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Value Health. 2014; 17(5):597-604.

[30] Li XJ, Gao SN, Liu GQ. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of pentoxifylline sustained release tablets in the treatment of diabetic foot. China J Pharm Econ. 2022; 17(8):11-15.

[31] Huang Y. Health Economic Evaluation of MDT Mode of Diabetic Foot Based on Markov Model [master’s thesis]. Guangzhou, China: Southern Medical University; 2020.

[32] He J, Qing F, Wen B, Liu S, Gui L, Zhu H. Research progress on drug resistance characteristics and treatment of pathogenic bacteria in patients with diabetic foot infection. Int J Clin Res. 2025; 9(3):45-50.

[33] Woods TJ, Tesfay F, Speck P, Kaambwa B. Economic evaluations considering costs and outcomes of diabetic foot ulcer infections: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2020; 15(4):e0232395.

[34] Redekop WK, Stolk EA, Kok E, Lovas K, Kalo Z, Busschbach JJV. Diabetic foot ulcers and amputations: estimates of health utility for use in cost-effectiveness analyses of new treatments. Diabetes Metab. 2004; 30(6):549-556.

[35] Pasta DJ, Taylor JL, Henning JM. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis incorporating the bootstrap: an example comparing treatments for the eradication of Helicobacter pylori. Med Decis Making. 1999; 19(3):353-363.

[36] Xie Y, Zong X, Sun LH. Application of non-parametric bootstrap method in the evaluation of confidence intervals of cost-effectiveness. China Pharm. 2010; 21(22):2027-2029.