A Cost Analysis of Icon Reusable Underwear Versus Disposable Pads for Mild to Moderate Urinary Incontinence.

MedStar author(s):
Citation: Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery. 26(9):575-579, 2020 09.PMID: 30001254Institution: MedStar Health Research Institute | MedStar Washington Hospital CenterDepartment: Obstetrics and Gynecology/Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery | Obstetrics and Gynecology/UrogynecologyForm of publication: Journal ArticleMedline article type(s): Journal ArticleSubject headings: *Diapers, Adult/ec [Economics] | *Incontinence Pads/ec [Economics] | *Urinary Incontinence/th [Therapy] | Cost-Benefit Analysis | Female | Humans | Urinary Incontinence/ec [Economics]Year: 2020ISSN:
  • 2151-8378
Name of journal: Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgeryAbstract: CONCLUSIONS: Reusable incontinence underwear can be an economically feasible alternative to disposable pads for light to moderate urinary incontinence after 2 years of use assuming underwear has a 2-year longevity and the consumer is using 2 PPD with regular underwear.METHODS: A consumer-perspective cost analysis was performed with the following assumptions: (1) consumers have mild to moderate urinary incontinence and use 2 pads per day (PPD); (2) consumers have a 2-week supply of underwear; (3) there is no difference in laundering cost between 2 incontinence options; (4) there is no difference in use of labor/other accessories of care; (5) there is no difference in skin complaints/associated cost; (6) cost of products are nonfluctuant with time; and (7) all incontinence products were purchased online. Sensitivity analyses were performed varying the longevity of underwear, price of regular underwear, price of pads, pads used per day, and shipping and handling.OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to perform a cost analysis assessing the economic feasibility of reusable underwear as alternative for disposable pads for women with mild to moderate urinary incontinence.RESULTS: The total cost of disposable pads with regular underwear was US All authors: Alam PA, Burkett LS, Clark BA, Huang JC, Richter LA Originally published: Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery. 26(9):575-579, 2020 Sep.Fiscal year: FY2021Digital Object Identifier: Date added to catalog: 2020-10-06
Holdings
Item type Current library Collection Call number Status Date due Barcode
Journal Article MedStar Authors Catalog Article 30001254 Available 30001254

CONCLUSIONS: Reusable incontinence underwear can be an economically feasible alternative to disposable pads for light to moderate urinary incontinence after 2 years of use assuming underwear has a 2-year longevity and the consumer is using 2 PPD with regular underwear.

METHODS: A consumer-perspective cost analysis was performed with the following assumptions: (1) consumers have mild to moderate urinary incontinence and use 2 pads per day (PPD); (2) consumers have a 2-week supply of underwear; (3) there is no difference in laundering cost between 2 incontinence options; (4) there is no difference in use of labor/other accessories of care; (5) there is no difference in skin complaints/associated cost; (6) cost of products are nonfluctuant with time; and (7) all incontinence products were purchased online. Sensitivity analyses were performed varying the longevity of underwear, price of regular underwear, price of pads, pads used per day, and shipping and handling.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to perform a cost analysis assessing the economic feasibility of reusable underwear as alternative for disposable pads for women with mild to moderate urinary incontinence.

RESULTS: The total cost of disposable pads with regular underwear was US 92.40, whereas the cost of Icon underwear was US 80.80 over the course of 2 years. Icon costs less than using regular underwear with disposable pads as long as the cost of the regular underwear is at least US .17. Icon is economically inferior if the cost per pad is US .15 when using 3 PPD or if the cost per pad is US .24 when using less than 2 PPD.

English

Powered by Koha