Cost-effectiveness of cryotherapy versus salicylic acid for the treatment of plantar warts: economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial (EVerT trial)

Eugena Stamuli, Sarah Cockayne, Catherine Elizabeth Hewitt, Kate Hicks, Shalmini Ushmanthi Jayakody, Arthur Ricky Kang'Ombe, Gwen Turner, Kim Thomas, Mike Curran, Farina Hashmi, Caroline McIntosh, Nichola McLarnon, David John Torgerson, Ian Scot Watt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background Plantar warts (verrucae) are extremely common. Although many will spontaneously disappear without treatment, treatment may be sought for a variety of reasons such as discomfort. There are a number of different treatments for cutaneous warts, with salicylic acid and cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen being two of the most common forms of treatment. To date, no full economic evaluation of either salicylic acid or cryotherapy has been conducted based on the use of primary data in a pragmatic setting. This paper describes
the cost-effectiveness analysis which was conducted alongside a pragmatic multicentre, randomised trial evaluating the clinical effectiveness of cryotherapy versus 50% salicylic acid of the treatment of plantar warts. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken alongside a pragmatic multicentre, randomised controlled trial assessing the clinical effectiveness of 50% salicylic acid and cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen at 12 weeks after randomisation of patients. Cost-effectiveness outcomes were expressed as the additional cost required to completely cure the plantar warts of one additional patient. A NHS perspective was taken for the analysis. Results Cryotherapy costs on average £101.17 (bias corrected and accelerated (BCA) 95% CI: 85.09–117.26) more per participant over the 12 week time-frame, while there is no additional benefit, in terms of proportion of patients healed compared with salicylic acid
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-10
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Foot and Ankle Research
Volume5
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 27 Feb 2012

Cite this