WHY TAPELESS---COST EFFECTIVENESS

“The Tapeless non-adhesive wound dressing and IV holders have proven to be clinically superior to conventional methods of securing dressings and IV lines. These unique products are extremely cost effective, as they are washable and reusable.” Mr. G.W., Hospital Administrator …. No longer is it sufficient to be only clinically effective. With the ever- shrinking healthcare dollar, people are asking if the product is cost effective. Cost is different than cost effectiveness. The initial cost may be reasonable, but if the product does not last very long, requires frequent changes or provides little value for the dollar, then it is not cost effective. Tapeless wound dressing holders have been evaluated as being both clinically effective and cost effective.

Tapeless provides cost effectiveness on several fronts, thereby having high value for many medical situations and facilities. First, Tapeless’ products impart cost effectiveness by virtue of the ability to be washed and reused. By following an easy regimen of washing and air-drying, the products not only resist shrinkage or change in shape, but may be used for several weeks without the need for replacement. Patients’ report the ability to have once daily or multiple dressing changes for up to, and beyond, a month without loss of clinical effectiveness. Second, the application of these dressing holders, which does not require wrapping or slipping over another body part, has been shown to save significant nursing time. This is one of the major factors in the cost of wound care. A study done by a major British hospital, demonstrated that by using the universal foot dressing holder (P/N 110) versus a common wrap, kerlex, with simply one dressing change per day for 2 weeks, saved 120 minutes of nursing time. A third mechanism for savings is the reduction in the production of biohazardous wound waste materials. This is a costly and constant problem when one deals with chronic wound situations. The ability of a patient to safely reuse his own secondary wound dressing reduces the need for rolls of gauze, tape, netting and their inherent problems. An additional cost factor, separate, yet related to the third cost savings, is the reduction in primary wound dressing materials required for each dressing change. A nurse evaluation reported that with each dressing change, “using the universal foot dressing holder (P/N 110), I could eliminate 1 Kerlex roll, 1 5” x 9” ABD pad and tape”. It doesn’t take long for these materials to add up to significant dollars. Finally, since the products increase patient compliance and allow the patient to either change their own dressing completely or in part, the number of visits to a patient’s home can be dramatically reduced, thereby allowing a better allocation of the healthcare’s limited time and resources.

For more information visit