A Low-Cost Alternative to Commercial Negative Pressure Wound Therapy using Wall Mounted suction : A Pilot Study

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) is an established method for managing acute and chronic wounds, promoting healing and reducing complications. However, the high costs associated with commercial NPWT devices limit accessibility, especially in resource-limited settings. This pilot study explores a low-cost alternative using commonly available materials and compares its effectiveness in wound management with commercial NPWT. Methods and Materials A prospective observational study involving 10 patients with various wound types suitable for NPWT was conducted at a Moroccan tertiary care hospital. A locally sourced NPWT alternative was implemented using wall-mounted suction, gauze, polyurethane films, and IV lines. Patients were followed for 4 weeks, and wound parameters were monitored at dressing changes. The cost of the alternative NPWT method was calculated based on local material prices. Results The alternative NPWT method effectively maintained controlled subatmospheric pressure on wounds, promoting granulation tissue formation and reducing edema and bacteria. Among the 10 patients enrolled, diverse wound types were observed, and wound healing parameters showed substantial improvement. Notably, wound area reduction (WAR) averaged 78.1%, wound volume reduction (WVR) averaged 85.7%, granulation tissue increased from 32.5% to 86.7%, and exudate reduced from moderate to minimal. Pain scores also decreased significantly. Adverse events were minor and manageable, with a mean cost of 12.4 USD per patient. Discussion This study demonstrates that the low-cost NPWT alternative achieved comparable outcomes to commercial NPWT reported in literature while utilizing easily accessible materials. It effectively reduced wound size, promoted tissue healing, managed exudate, and controlled pain. Importantly, it offered cost-effectiveness, accessibility, and adaptability to diverse clinical settings. Conclusion The low-cost alternative to commercial NPWT using standard materials showed promising results in wound management, offering similar outcomes to commercial NPWT at a substantially lower cost. This alternative holds potential for application in resource-limited settings where commercial NPWT is inaccessible or unaffordable. Larger randomized controlled studies with longer follow-up periods are warranted to validate these findings and compare this alternative with other wound care modalities.