No / To summarise the clinical and economic literature relating to the effect of Cavilon No Sting Barrier Film on the incidence of incontinence-associated dermatitis, which is a risk factor for pressure ulceration and exudate-related peri-wound skin damage. Method: A systematic literature search was performed using available computerised databases for publications on Cavilon barrier film and other relevant terms. Six clinical studies were identified providing data on 1,563 patients treated with the barrier film or a comparator. The publications comprised prospective studies, randomised and non-randomised studies, multicentre trials, single-centre reports and a volunteer study. Due to the nature of the comparators, five studies were open-label. Differences in methodology and outcomes made a qualitative review the most appropriate analysis. Results: The barrier film was at least as effective as petroleum ointments and more effective than zinc oxide formulations in preventing incontinence-associated dermatitis. The barrier film was also effective in peri-wound skin protection, although its clinical efficacy was not significantly different to that of petroleum ointments and zinc oxide formulations. Nevertheless, the barrier film was more cost-effective than either petroleum ointments or zinc oxide formulations in managing incontinence-associated dermatitis and peri-wound skin protection, largely due to savings in nursing time. Conclusion: The barrier film is at least as clinically effective and potentially more cost-effective in incontinence-associated dermatitis prophylaxis and peri-wound skin protection than petroleum ointments or zinc oxide formulations, releasing health care resources for alternative use. Further studies are required to quantify the relative efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the barrier film and other barrier formulations in different clinical settings and enhance the quality of the evidence base.

To estimate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of using a skin protectant (Cavilon No Sting Barrier Film [NSBF] or Cavilon Durable Barrier Cream [DBC]; 3M) compared with not using a skin protectant in the management of venous leg ulcers (VLUs), in the UK. Method: A decision model was constructed depicting the patient pathways and associated management of a cohort of patients with and without a Cavilon formulation, plus dressings and compression. The model was based on the case records of a cohort of matched patients from The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database, who were first diagnosed with a VLU between 1 Jan 2008 and 31 Dec 2009. The model estimated the costs and outcomes of patient management over 6 months and the cost-effectiveness of using a Cavilon formulation relative to not using a skin protectant. Results: Patients' mean age was 80.2 years and 61% were female. Sixty-five per cent (n=166) of Cavilon patients received NSBF, and 35% received DBC. Between 6% and 9% of VLUs were healed at 6 months and 53–66% became infected. Healing was affected by a patient's age (OR: 0.944 for each additional year), but not by gender, level of exudate or wound size. There was a significantly greater reduction in wound size among patients in the NSBF group than in the other two groups (p < 0.001). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the initial wound size of those VLUs that did and did not heal in the two Cavilon groups; however, initial size of the VLUs that healed in the control group was significantly smaller than those that did not (p<0.001). Resource use was similar between the three groups. Patients were predominantly managed by practice nurses, with a mean 37–38 nurse visits over the study period. Patients' dressings were changed, on average, every 4–5 days, with a mean of 3 dressings under a compression bandage. The total 6-monthly NHS cost of managing a VLU was ∼£2200. Practice nurse visits were the primary cost driver, accounting for up to 58% of the 6-monthly NHS cost, whereas dressings accounted for < 10% of the cost. Conclusion: Use of NSBF leads to significantly greater wound size reduction than that observed in the other two groups and may facilitate the healing of larger wounds without increasing costs. Hence, use of NSBF for peri-wound skin protection in patients with exuding VLUs is the preferred treatment strategy. / 3M Health Care, manufacturers of Cavillon NSBF and Cavillon DBC