The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The health economic burden that acute and chronic wounds impose on an average clinical commissioning group/health board in the UK
Abstract
Objective: To estimate the patterns of care and related resource use attributable to managing acute and chronic wounds among a catchment population of a typical clinical commissioning group (CCG)/health board and corresponding National Health Service (NHS) costs in the UK. Method: This was a sub-analysis of a retrospective cohort analysis of the records of 2000 patients in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database. Patients' characteristics, wound-related health outcomes and health-care resource use were quantified for an average CCG/health board with a catchment population of 250,000 adults ≥18 years of age, and the corresponding NHS cost of patient management was estimated at 2013/2014 prices. Results: An average CCG/health board was estimated to be managing 11,200 wounds in 2012/2013. Of these, 40% were considered to be acute wounds, 48% chronic and 12% lacking any specific diagnosis. The prevalence of acute, chronic and unspecified wounds was estimated to be growing at the rate of 9%, 12% and 13% per annum respectively. Our analysis indicated that the current rate of wound healing must increase by an average of at least 1% per annum across all wound types in order to slow down the increasing prevalence. Otherwise, an average CCG/health board is predicted to manage ~23,200 wounds per annum by 2019/2020 and is predicted to spend a discounted (the process of determining the present value of a payment that is to be received in the future) £50 million on managing these wounds and associated comorbidities. Conclusion: Real-world evidence highlights the substantial burden that acute and chronic wounds impose on an average CCG/health board. Strategies are required to improve the accuracy of diagnosis and healing rates.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Guest, J. F., Fuller, G. W., & Vowden, P. (2020) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045253 · Cited by 536
Self-citationFirst-Line Interactive Wound Dressing Update: A Comprehensive Review of the Evidence
Weller, C. D., Team, V., & Sussman, G. (2020) · Frontiers in Pharmacology · doi:10.3389/fphar.2020.00155 · Cited by 264
Continuum of care in hard-to-heal wounds by copper dressings: A case series
Melamed, E., & Borkow, G. (2023) · Journal of Wound Care · doi:10.12968/jowc.2023.32.12.788 · Cited by 11
Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Cutaneous Wound Healing
Camões, S. P., Santos, J. M., Carvalho, F., & Miranda, J. P. (2020) · Learning Materials in Biosciences · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-43939-2_13 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Guest, J. F., Vowden, K., & Vowden, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Wound Care
- Publisher
- Mark Allen Group
- Published
- 2017-06-02
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 292-303
- ISSN
- 0969-0700 (ISSN-L)
- 2052-2916
- OpenAlex
- W2622124690
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The health economic burden that acute and chronic wounds impose on an average clinical commissioning group/health board in the UK. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.6.292
- The paper
- Guest, J. F., Vowden, K., & Vowden, P. (2017). The health economic burden that acute and chronic wounds impose on an average clinical commissioning group/health board in the UK. Journal of Wound Care. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.6.292
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.