IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v16y2018i6d10.1007_s40258-018-0427-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

SecurAcath for Securing Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Macmillan

    (King’s College London)

  • Mark Pennington

    (King’s College London)

  • Jennifer A. Summers

    (King’s College London)

  • Kate Goddard

    (King’s College London)

  • Darshan Zala

    (King’s College London)

  • Naomi Herz

    (King’s College London)

  • Janet L. Peacock

    (King’s College London)

  • Stephen Keevil

    (King’s College London)

  • Anastasia Chalkidou

    (King’s College London)

Abstract

Central venous catheters are commonly used to deliver therapies and to monitor patients, and require securing at the point of percutaneous entry to avoid dislodgement. SecurAcath is a catheter securement device designed for central venous catheters. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, as a part of its Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme, selected this device for evaluation and invited the manufacturer, Interrad Medical, to submit clinical and economic evidence. The King’s Technology Evaluation Centre, an External Assessment Centre commissioned by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, independently critiqued the manufacturer’s submissions. The External Assessment Centre found a lack of evidence comparing SecurAcath with alternative approaches to securement (StatLock, suturing, tape securement), with one unpublished randomised controlled trial providing the strongest evidence. The External Assessment Centre conducted a new systematic review and meta-analysis and concluded that there is some evidence indicating the non-inferiority of SecurAcath compared to StatLock. The External Assessment Centre considered the manufacturer’s economic model to be appropriate but made revisions to some parameters and noted significant heterogeneity in the included studies. The revised model indicated that StatLock was more cost effective than SecurAcath for catheter indwell times of up to 5 days; however, for medium- and long-term indwell times, SecurAcath was the most cost-effective option. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Medical Technologies Guidance MTG 34, issued in June 2017, recommended the adoption of SecurAcath for securing peripherally inserted central catheters within the National Health Service in England.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Macmillan & Mark Pennington & Jennifer A. Summers & Kate Goddard & Darshan Zala & Naomi Herz & Janet L. Peacock & Stephen Keevil & Anastasia Chalkidou, 2018. "SecurAcath for Securing Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 779-791, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:16:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-018-0427-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-018-0427-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-018-0427-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-018-0427-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:16:y:2018:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-018-0427-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.