Annual epidemiological and health insurance disease burden of hip osteoarthritis in Hungary based on nationwide data.

BACKGROUND: Health services utilization related to hip osteoarthritis imposes a significant burden on society and health care systems. Our aim was to analyse the epidemiological and health insurance disease burden of hip osteoarthritis in Hungary based on nationwide data. METHODS: Data were extracted from the nationwide financial database of the National Health Insurance Fund Administration (NHIFA) of Hungary for the year 2018. The analysed data included annual patient numbers, prevalence, and age-standardized prevalence per 100,000 population in outpatient care, health insurance costs calculated for age groups and sexes for all types of care. Patients with hip osteoarthritis were identified using code M16 of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), 10th revision. Age-standardised prevalence rates were calculated using the European Standard Population 2013 (ESP2013). RESULTS: Based on patient numbers of outpatient care, the prevalence per 100,000 among males was 1,483.7 patients (1.5%), among females 2,905.5 (2.9%), in total 2,226.2 patients (2.2%). The age-standardised prevalence was 1,734.8 (1.7%) for males and 2,594.8 (2.6%) for females per 100,000 population, for a total of 2,237.6 (2.2%). The prevalence per 100,000 population was higher for women in all age groups. In age group 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69 and 70 + the overall prevalence was 0.2%, 0.8%, 2.7%, 5.0% and 7.7%, respectively, describing a continuously increasing trend. In 2018, the NHIFA spent 42.31 million EUR on the treatment of hip osteoarthritis. Hip osteoarthritis accounts for 1% of total nationwide health insurance expenditures. 36.8% of costs were attributed to the treatment of male patients, and 63.2% to female patients. Acute inpatient care, outpatient care and chronic and rehabilitation inpatient care were the main cost drivers, accounting for 62.7%, 14.6% and 8.2% of the total health care expenditure for men, and 51.0%, 20.0% and 11.2% for women, respectively. The average annual treatment cost per patient was 3,627 EUR for men and 4,194 EUR for women. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of hip osteoarthritis was 1.96 times higher (the age-standardised prevalence was 1.5 times higher) in women compared to men. Acute inpatient care was the major cost driver in the treatment of hip osteoarthritis. The average annual treatment cost per patient was 15.6% higher for women compared to men.

Evaluation of patient reported outcome measures and costs of managing osteoarthritis of the hip.

The number of hospital admissions for a hip prosthesis increased by more than 91% between 2002 and 2019 in Belgium (1), making it one of the most common interventions in hospitals. The objective of this study is to evaluate patient-report- ed outcomes and hospital costs of hip replacement six months after surgery. Both generic (EQ-5D) and specific (HOOS) PROMs of general hospital patients undergoing hip replacement surgery in 2021 were conducted. The results of these PROMs were then combined with financial and health management data. The mean difference (SD) in QALYs between the preoperative and postoperative phases is 0.20 QALYs (0.32 QALYs). The average cost (SD) of all stays is €4,792 (€1,640). Amongst the five dimensions evaluated in the EQ-5D health questionnaire, the 'pain' dimension seems to be associated with the greatest improvement in quality of life. As regards Belgium, the 26,066 arthroplasties performed in 2020 might constitute a gain of 123,000 years of life in good health. The relationship between QALYs and costs described in this study posits a ratio of €23,960 per year of life gained in good health. Given that in Belgium more than 3% of the hospital healthcare budget is devoted to hip prostheses, it would seem relevant to us to apply PROM tools to the entire patient population to assess treatment effectiveness more broadly, identify patient needs and, also, monitor the quality of care provided.

Are education, exercise and diet interventions a cost-effective treatment to manage hip and knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify research gaps and inform implementation we systematically reviewed the literature evaluating cost-effectiveness of recommended treatments (education, exercise and diet) for the management of hip and/or knee OA. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database, and EconLit from inception to November 2019 for trial-based economic evaluations investigating hip and/or knee OA core treatments. Two investigators screened relevant publications, extracted data and synthesized results. Risk of bias was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list. RESULTS: Two cost-minimization, five cost-effectiveness and 16 cost-utility analyses evaluated core treatments in six health systems. Exercise therapy with and without education or diet was cost-effective or cost-saving compared to education or physician-delivered usual care at conventional willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds in 15 out of 16 publications. Exercise interventions were cost-effective compared to physiotherapist-delivered usual care in three studies at conventional WTP thresholds. Education interventions were not cost-effective compared to usual care or placebo at conventional WTP thresholds in three out of four publications. CONCLUSIONS: Structured core treatment programs were clinically effective and cost-effective, compared to physician-delivered usual care, in five health care systems. Providing education about core treatments was not consistently cost-effective. Implementing structured core treatment programs into funded clinical pathways would likely be an efficient use of health system resources and enhance physician-delivered usual primary care.

Patients', healthcare providers', and insurance company employees' preferences for knee and hip osteoarthritis care: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVE: To determine patients', healthcare providers', and insurance company employees' preferences for knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) care. DESIGN: In a discrete choice experiment, patients with KHOA or a joint replacement, healthcare providers, and insurance company employees were repetitively asked to choose between KHOA care alternatives that differed in six attributes: waiting times, out of pocket costs, travel distance, involved healthcare providers, duration of consultation, and access to specialist equipment. A (panel latent class) conditional logit model was used to determine preference heterogeneity and relative importance of the attributes. RESULTS: Patients (n = 648) and healthcare providers (n = 76) valued low out of pocket costs most, while insurance company employees (n = 150) found a joint consultation by general practitioner (GP) and orthopaedist most important. Patients found the duration of consultation less important than healthcare providers and insurance company employees did. Patients without a joint replacement were likely to prefer healthcare with low out of pocket costs. Patients with a joint replacement and/or low disease-specific quality of life were likely to prefer healthcare from an orthopaedist. Patients who already received healthcare for knee/hip problems were likely to prefer a joint consultation by GP and orthopaedist, and direct access to specialist equipment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, healthcare providers, and insurance company employees highly prefer a joint consultation by GP and orthopaedist with low out of pocket costs. Within patients, there is substantial preference heterogeneity. These results can be used by policy makers and healthcare providers to choose the most optimal combination of KHOA care aligned to patients' preferences.

Socioeconomic status of patients in a Swedish national self-management program for osteoarthritis compared with the general population-a descriptive observational study.

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) including education and supervised exercises, delivered as a self-management program, is considered one of the mainstays in OA treatment. However, the socioeconomic profile of the population that utilizes first-line treatment for hip and knee OA is unclear. The aim of this study was to describe the socioeconomic status (SES) of a population referred to a self-management program for OA, in comparison with that of the general Swedish population. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study including 72,069 patients with hip or knee OA enrolled in the National Quality Register for Better management of patients with Osteoarthritis (BOA) between 2008 and 2016, and registered before participation in a structured OA self-management program. A reference cohort (n = 216,207) was selected from the general Swedish population by one-to-three matching by year of birth, sex and residence. Residential municipality, country of birth, marital status, family type, educational level, employment, occupation, disposable income and sick leave were analyzed. RESULTS: The BOA population had higher educational level than the reference group, both regarding patients with hip OA (77.5% vs 70% with ≥10 years of education), and with knee OA (77% vs 72% with ≥10 years of education). Their average disposable income was higher (median [IQR] in Euro (€), for hip €17,442 [10,478] vs €15,998 [10,659], for knee €17,794 [10,574] vs €16,578 [11,221]). Of those who worked, 46% of patients with hip OA and 45% of the reference group had a blue-collar occupation. The corresponding numbers for knee OA were 51 and 44% respectively. Sick leave was higher among those with hip and knee OA (26%) than those in the reference groups (13% vs 12%). CONCLUSIONS: The consistently higher SES in the BOA population compared with the general population indicates that this self-management program for OA may not reach the more socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, who are often those with a higher disease burden.

Health resource use and costs of symptomatic knee and/or hip osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Data on the economic consequences of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) are scarce. We aimed to estimate the annual direct and indirect costs for patients followed for hip and/or knee OA in the Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis Long term Assessment (KHOALA) cohort. METHODS: The KHOALA cohort, set up from 2007 to 2009, is a French multicenter study of 878 individuals with symptomatic knee/hip OA who were 40-75 years old. Resources used were collected annually for 5 years. Costs were assigned by using official sources and expressed in 2018 euros per patient. RESULTS: The mean annual total costs per patient over the 5-year study period were 2,180 ± 5,305€. The mean annual direct medical costs per patient were 2,120 ± 5,275€ and mean annual indirect costs per patient 180 ± 1,735€ for people of working age. Costs increased slightly over the study period. Drugs were the largest cost share, representing over 50% of all direct costs. However, the proportion attributable to OA drugs accounted for only 10.5% of drug costs. The second cost share was hospitalizations; hip and knee prosthetic surgery accounted for 27% of surgery hospitalization costs. Health professional visits were the third cost share, accounting for 3% of direct medical costs. The median costs induced could be as high as 2 billion €/year (IQR 0.7-4.3) in France. CONCLUSION: Hip and knee OA costs were substantial and increased over the study period in France. However, the costs attributable to OA represented only a small fraction of overall costs.

Incremental clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of providing supervised physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: 2-year results of the MOA randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness at 2-year follow-up of providing individual, supervised exercise physiotherapy and/or manual physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care. METHOD: People with hip or knee osteoarthritis meeting the American College of Rheumatology clinical diagnostic criteria were randomised (1:1, concealed, assessor-blinded) to four groups: usual medical care; supervised exercise physiotherapy; manual physiotherapy; or combined exercise and manual physiotherapy. Physiotherapy group participants were provided 10 50-min treatment sessions including booster sessions at 4 and 13 months, in addition to usual care. The primary outcome at 2-year follow-up was incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of each physiotherapy intervention in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, from the health system and societal perspectives. To allow interpretation of negative ICURs, we report incremental net benefit (INB). The primary clinical outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). RESULTS: Of 206 patients, 186 (90·3%) were retained at 2-year follow-up. Exercise physiotherapy and manual physiotherapy dominated usual care, demonstrating cost savings; combined therapy did not. Exercise therapy had the highest incremental net benefits (INBs), statistically significant at all willingness-to-pay (base-case: societal New Zealand (NZ)$6,312, 95%CI 334 to 12,279; health system NZ$8,065, 95%CI 136 to 15,994). Clinical improvements were superior to usual care only in the exercise physiotherapy group (-28.2 WOMAC points, 95%CI -49.2 to -7.1). No serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSION: Individually supervised exercise therapy is cost-effective and clinically effective in addition to usual medical care at 2-year follow-up, and leads to cost savings for the health system and society. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospectively registered with the Australian NZ Clinical Trials Registry, reference ACTRN12608000130369.

EQ-5D-5L utilities per health states in Spanish population with knee or hip osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to obtain utilities by means of EQ-5D-5L for different health states in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) or hip osteoarthritis (HOA) in Spain, and to compare these values with those used in foreign studies with the aim of discussing their transferability for their use in economic evaluations conducted in Spain. METHODS: Primary study: Observational prospective study of KOA or HOA patients in Spain. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected to characterize the sample. Utilities were elicited using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. ANOVA and bivariable analyses were conducted to identify differences between health states. LITERATURE REVIEW: Using the bibliographic databases NSH EED and CEA Registry, we conducted searches of model-based cost utilities analyses of technologies in KOA or HOA patients. Health states and utilities were extracted and compared with values obtained from the Spanish sample. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-seven subjects with KOA and 361 subjects with HOA were included, with average utilities of 0.544 and 0.520, respectively. In both samples, differences were found in utilities according to level of pain, stiffness and physical function (WOMAC) and severity of symptoms (Oxford scales), so that the worst the symptoms, the lower the utilities. The utilities after surgery were higher than before surgery. Due to limitations from our study related to sample size and observational design, it was not possible to estimate utilities for approximately half the health states included in the published models because they were directly related to specific technologies. For almost 100% of health states of the selected studies we obtained very different utilities from those reported in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first article with detailed utilities estimated using the EQ-5D-5L in Spain for KOA and HOA patients. In both populations, utilities are lower for worse health states in terms of level of pain, stiffness and physical function according to WOMAC, and according to the Oxford scales. Most utilities obtained from the Spanish sample are lower than those reported in the international literature. Further studies estimating utilities from local populations are required to avoid the use of foreign sources in economic evaluations.

The projected burden of primary total knee and hip replacement for osteoarthritis in Australia to the year 2030.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive national joint replacement registries with well-validated data offer unique opportunities for examining the potential future burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) at a population level. This study aimed to forecast the burden of primary total knee (TKR) and hip replacements (THR) performed for OA in Australia to the year 2030, and to model the impact of contrasting obesity scenarios on TKR burden. METHODS: De-identified TKR and THR data for 2003-2013 were obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Population projections and obesity trends were obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, with public and private hospital costs sourced from the National Hospital Cost Data Collection. Procedure rates were projected according to two scenarios: (1) constant rate of surgery from 2013 onwards; and (2) continued growth in surgery rates based on 2003-2013 growth. Sensitivity analyses were used to estimate future TKR burden if: (1) obesity rates continued to increase linearly; or (2) 1-5% of the overweight or obese population attained a normal body mass index. RESULTS: Based on recent growth, the incidence of TKR and THR for OA is estimated to rise by 276% and 208%, respectively, by 2030. The total cost to the healthcare system would be $AUD5.32 billion, of which $AUD3.54 billion relates to the private sector. Projected growth in obesity rates would result in 24,707 additional TKRs totalling $AUD521 million. A population-level reduction in obesity could result in up to 8062 fewer procedures and cost savings of up to $AUD170 million. CONCLUSIONS: If surgery trends for OA continue, Australia faces an unsustainable joint replacement burden by 2030, with significant healthcare budget and health workforce implications. Strategies to reduce national obesity could produce important TKR savings.

Preoperative Prediction of Value Metrics and a Patient-Specific Payment Model for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Model.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective was to develop and test an artificial neural network (ANN) that learns and predicts length of stay (LOS), inpatient charges, and discharge disposition for total hip arthroplasty. The secondary objective was to create a patient-specific payment model (PSPM) accounting for patient complexity. METHODS: Using 15 preoperative variables from 78,335 primary total hip arthroplasty cases for osteoarthritis from the National Inpatient Sample and our institutional database, an ANN was developed to predict LOS, charges, and disposition. Validity metrics included accuracy and area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Predictive uncertainty was stratified by All Patient Refined comorbidity cohort to establish the PSPM. RESULTS: The dynamic model demonstrated "learning" in the first 30 training rounds with areas under the curve of 82.0%, 83.4%, and 79.4% for LOS, charges, and disposition, respectively. The proposed PSPM established a risk increase of 2.5%, 8.9%, and 17.3% for moderate, major, and severe comorbidities, respectively. CONCLUSION: The deep learning ANN demonstrated "learning" with good reliability, responsiveness, and validity in its prediction of value-centered outcomes. This model can be applied to implement a PSPM for tiered payments based on the complexity of the case.

Use of the Corail stem for revision total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of clinical outcomes and cost

Background: With the growing number of total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures performed, revision surgery is also proportionately increasing, resulting in greater health care expenditures. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical outcomes and cost when using a collared, fully hydroxyapatite-coated primary femoral stem for revision THA compared to commonly used revision femoral stems. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients who underwent revision THA with a primary stem between 2011 and 2016 and matched them on demographic variables and reason for revision to a similar cohort who underwent revision THA. We extracted operative data and information on in-hospital resource use from the patients' charts to calculate average cost per procedure. Patient-reported outcomes were recorded preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Results: We included 20 patients in our analysis, of whom 10 received a primary stem and 10, a typical revision stem. There were no significant between-group differences in mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, Harris Hip Score, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) Mental Composite Scale score or Physical Composite Scale score at 1 year. Operative time was significantly shorter and total cost was significantly lower (mean difference ­3707.64, 95% confidence interval ­5532.85 to ­1882.43) with a primary stem than with other revision femoral stems. Conclusion: We found similar clinical outcomes and significant institutional cost savings with a primary femoral stem in revision THA. This suggests a role for a primary femoral stem such as a collared, fully hydroxyapatite-coated stem for revision THA.

Contexte: Avec le nombre croissant d'interventions pour prothèse de hanche (PTH) effectuées, la chirurgie de révision est aussi proportionnellement en hausse, ce qui entraîne des coûts supérieurs pour le système de santé. Le but de cette étude était d'évaluer les résultats cliniques et le coût associés à l'emploi d'une prothèse fémorale primaire à collerette entièrement recouverte d'hydroxyapatite pour la révision de PTH, comparativement à d'autres prothèses d'usage courant utilisées pour les révisions. Méthodes: Nous avons identifié rétrospectivement les patients ayant subi une révision de PTH avec une prothèse primaire entre 2011 et 2016 et nous les avons assortis selon les caractéristiques démographiques et le motif de la révision à une cohorte similaire soumise à une révision de PTH. Nous avons extrait les données sur l'opération et sur l'utilisation des ressources hospitalières à partir des dossiers des patients pour calculer le coût par intervention. Les résultats déclarés par les patients ont été notés avant l'intervention et 1 an après. Résultats: Nous avons inclus 20 patients dans notre analyse, dont 10 ont reçu une prothèse primaire et 10, une révision de prothèse typique. On n'a noté aucune différence significative entre les groupes pour ce qui est du score WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) moyen pour l'arthrose, du score de Harris pour la hanche, ou des sous-échelles santé mentale ou santé physique à 1 an du questionnaire SF-12 (12-Item Short Form Health Survey). L'intervention a duré significativement moins longtemps et le coût a été significativement moindre (différence moyenne ­3707,64, intervalle de confiance de 95 % ­5532,85 à ­1882,43) avec une prothèse primaire qu'avec les autres prothèses de révision. Conclusion: Nous avons observé des résultats cliniques similaires et des économies significatives pour l'établissement avec la prothèse primaire utilisée pour la révision de PTH. Cela donne à penser que la prothèse fémorale primaire, par exemple, à collerette et entièrement recouverte d'hydroxyapatite, aurait un rôle à jouer pour la révision de PTH.

Cost-effectiveness of a blended physiotherapy intervention compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis: a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Blended physiotherapy, in which physiotherapy sessions and an online application are integrated, might support patients in taking an active role in the management of their chronic condition and may reduce disease related costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a blended physiotherapy intervention (e-Exercise) compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with osteoarthritis of hip and/or knee, from the societal as well as the healthcare perspective. METHODS: This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 12-month cluster randomized controlled trial, in which 108 patients received e-Exercise, consisting of physiotherapy sessions and a web-application, and 99 patients received usual physiotherapy. Clinical outcome measures were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) according to the EuroQol (EQ-5D-3 L), physical functioning (HOOS/KOOS) and physical activity (Actigraph Accelerometer). Costs were measured using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were multiply imputed and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty. RESULTS: Intervention costs and medication costs were significantly lower in e-Exercise compared to usual physiotherapy. Total societal costs and total healthcare costs did not significantly differ between groups. No significant differences in effectiveness were found between groups. For physical functioning and physical activity, the maximum probability of e-Exercise being cost-effective compared to usual physiotherapy was moderate (< 0.82) from both perspectives. For QALYs, the probability of e-Exercise being cost-effective compared to usual physiotherapy was 0.68/0.84 at a willingness to pay of 10,000 Euro and 0.70/0.80 at a willingness to pay of 80,000 Euro per gained QALY, from respectively the societal and the healthcare perspective. CONCLUSIONS: E-Exercise itself was significantly cheaper compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis, but not cost-effective from the societal- as well as healthcare perspective. The decision between both interventions can be based on the preferences of the patient and the physiotherapist. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR4224 (25 October 2013).

A randomised controlled trial of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided intra-articular corticosteroid and local anaesthetic injections: the hip injection trial (HIT) protocol.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the effectiveness of intra-articular corticosteroid injection for hip osteoarthritis is limited and conflicting. The primary objective of the Hip Injection Trial (HIT) is to compare pain intensity over 6 months, in people with hip OA between those receiving an ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection of corticosteroid with 1% lidocaine hydrochloride plus best current treatment with those receiving best current treatment alone. Secondary objectives are to determine specified comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes, and to explore, in a linked qualitative study, the lived experiences of patients with hip OA and experiences and impact of, ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection. METHODS: The HIT trial is a pragmatic, three-parallel group, single-blind, superiority, randomised controlled trial in patients with painful hip OA with a linked qualitative study. The current protocol is described, in addition to details and rationale for amendments since trial registration. 204 patients with moderate-to-severe hip OA will be recruited. Participants are randomised on an equal basis (1:1:1 ratio) to one of three interventions: (1) best current treatment, (2) best current treatment plus ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection of corticosteroid (triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg) with 1% lidocaine hydrochloride, or (3) best current treatment plus an ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection of 1% lidocaine hydrochloride alone. The primary endpoint is patient-reported hip pain intensity across 2 weeks, 2 months, 4 months and 6 months post-randomisation. Recruitment is over 29 months with a 6-month follow-up period. To address the primary objective, the analysis will compare participants' 'average' follow-up pain NRS scores, based on a random effects linear repeated-measures model. Data on adverse events are collected and reported in accordance with national guidance and reviewed by external monitoring committees. Individual semi-structured interviews are being conducted with up to 30 trial participants across all three arms of the trial. DISCUSSION: To ensure healthcare services improve outcomes for patients, we need to ensure there is a robust and appropriate evidence-base to support clinical decision making. The HIT trial will answer important questions regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intra-articular corticosteroid injections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN: 50550256 , 28th July 2015.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients 80 Years of Age and Older.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients 80 years old. METHODS: A Markov, state-transition model projecting lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was constructed to determine cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. Costs (in 2016 US dollars), health state utilities, and state transition probabilities were obtained from published literature. Primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate parameter assumptions. RESULTS: At our base-case values, THA was cost-effective compared to non-operative treatment with a total lifetime accrued cost of $186,444 vs $182,732, and a higher lifetime accrued utility (5.60 vs 5.09). Cost per QALY for THA was $33,318 vs $35,914 for non-operative management, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $7307 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated THA to be cost-effective with a utility of successful primary THA above 0.67, a peri-operative mortality risk below 0.14, and a risk of primary THA failure below 0.14. Analysis further demonstrated that THA is a cost-effective option below a base-rate mortality threshold of 0.19, corresponding to the average base-rate mortality of a 93-year-old individual. Markov cohort analysis indicated that for patients undergoing THA at age 80 there was an approximate 28% reduction in total lifetime long-term assisted living expenditure compared to non-operatively managed patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis. CONCLUSION: The results of our model demonstrate that THA is a cost-effective option compared to non-operative management in patients ≥80 years old. This analysis may inform policy regarding THA in elderly patients.

Cost-Effectiveness of Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Nonoperative Management in Normal, Overweight, Obese, Severely Obese, Morbidly Obese, and Super Obese Patients: A Markov Model.

BACKGROUND: We estimated the cost-effectiveness of performing total hip arthroplasty (THA) vs nonoperative management (NM) among 6 body mass index (BMI) cohorts. METHODS: We constructed a state-transition Markov model to compare the cost utility of THA and NM in the 6 BMI groups over a 15-year period. Model parameters for transition probability (risk of revision, re-revision, and death), utility, and costs (inflation adjusted to 2017 US dollars) were estimated from the literature. Direct medical costs of managing hip arthritis were accounted in the model. Indirect societal costs were not included. A 3% annual discount rate was used for costs and utilities. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of THA vs NM. One-way and Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analyses of the model parameters were performed to determine the robustness of the model. RESULTS: Over the 15-year time period, the ICERs for THA vs NM were the following: normal weight ($6043/QALYs [quality-adjusted life years]), overweight ($5770/QALYs), obese ($5425/QALYs), severely obese ($7382/QALYs), morbidly obese ($8338/QALYs), and super obese ($16,651/QALYs). The 2 highest BMI groups had higher incremental QALYs and incremental costs. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that THA would be cost-effective in 100% of the normal, overweight, obese, severely obese, and morbidly obese simulations, and 99.95% of super obese simulations at an ICER threshold of $50,000/QALYs. CONCLUSION: Even at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALYs, which is considered low for the United States, our model showed that THA would be cost-effective for all obesity levels. BMI cut-offs for THA may lead to unnecessary loss of healthcare access.

Hip Fractures and the Bundle: A Cost Analysis of Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture vs Degenerative Joint Disease.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to determine whether episode Target Prices in the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative sufficiently match the complexities and expenses expected for patients undergoing hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fracture (FNF) as compared to hip degenerative joint disease (DJD). METHODS: Claims data under BPCI Model 2 were collected for patients undergoing hip arthroplasty at a single institution over a 2-year period. Payments from the index hospitalization to 90 days postoperatively were aggregated by Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Group (469 or 470), indication (DJD vs FNF), and categorized as index procedure, postacute services, and related hospital readmissions. Actual episode costs and Target Prices were compared in both the FNF and DJD cohorts undergoing hip arthroplasty to gauge the cost discrepancy in each group. RESULTS: A total of 183 patients were analyzed (31 with FNFs, 152 with DJD). In total, the FNF cohort incurred a $415,950 loss under the current episode Target Prices, whereas the DJD cohort incurred a $172,448 gain. Episode Target Prices were significantly higher than actual episode prices for the DJD cohort ($32,573 vs $24,776, P < .001). However, Target Prices were significantly lower than actual episode prices for the FNF cohort ($32,672 vs $49,755, P = .021). CONCLUSION: Episode Target Prices in the current BPCI model fall dramatically short of the actual expenses incurred by FNF patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. Better risk-adjusting Target Prices for this fragile population should be considered to avoid disincentives and delays in care.

The Frank Stinchfield Award : Total Hip Arthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture Is Not a Typical DRG 470: A Propensity-matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are a major public health concern. For displaced femoral neck fractures, the needs for medical services during hospitalization and extending beyond hospital discharge after total hip arthroplasty (THA) may be different than the needs after THA performed for osteoarthritis (OA), yet these differences are largely uncharacterized, and the Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Groups system does not distinguish between THA performed for fracture and OA. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the differences in in-hospital and 30-day postoperative clinical outcomes for THA performed for femoral neck fracture versus OA? (2) Is a patient's fracture status, that is whether or not a patient has a femoral neck fracture, associated with differences in in-hospital and 30-day postoperative clinical outcomes after THA? METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, which contains outcomes for surgical patients up to 30 days after discharge, was used to identify patients undergoing THA for OA and femoral neck fracture. OA and fracture cohorts were matched one-to-one using propensity scores based on age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, and medical comorbidities. Propensity scores represented the conditional probabilities for each patient having a femoral neck fracture based on their individual characteristics, excluding their actual fracture status. Outcomes of interest included operative time, length of stay (LOS), complications, transfusion, discharge destination, and readmission. There were 42,692 patients identified (41,739 OA; 953 femoral neck fractures) with 953 patients in each group for the matched analysis. RESULTS: For patients with fracture, operative times were slightly longer (98 versus 92 minutes, p = 0.015), they experienced longer LOS (6 versus 4 days, p < 0.001), and the overall frequency of complications was greater compared with patients with OA (16% versus 6%, p < 0.001). Although the frequency of preoperative transfusions was higher in the fracture group (2.0% versus 0.2%, p = 0.002), the frequency of postoperative transfusion was not different between groups (27% versus 24%, p = 0.157). Having a femoral neck fracture versus OA was strongly associated with any postoperative complication (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.8]; p < 0.001), unplanned readmission (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.0-3.2; p = 0.049), and discharge to an inpatient facility (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-2.0; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with THA for OA, THA for femoral neck fracture is associated with greater rates of complications, longer LOS, more likely discharge to continued inpatient care, and higher rates of unplanned readmission. This implies higher resource utilization for patients with a fracture. These differences exist despite matching of other preoperative risk factors. As healthcare reimbursement moves toward bundled payment models, it would seem important to differentiate patients and procedures based on the resource utilization they represent to healthcare systems. These results show different expected resource utilization in these two fundamentally different groups of patients undergoing hip arthroplasty, suggesting a need to modify healthcare policy to maintain access to THA for all patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for the management of osteoarthritis: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study is to assess the existing evidence on the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for the management of knee and hip osteoarthritis by systematically reviewing published economic evaluation studies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted for the period 2004 to 2016. Electronic databases were searched to identify both trial and model based economic evaluation studies that evaluated surgical interventions for knee and hip osteoarthritis. RESULTS: A total of 23 studies met the inclusion criteria and an assessment of these studies showed that total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) showed evidence of cost-effectiveness and improvement in quality of life of the patients when compared to non-operative and non-surgical procedures. On the other hand, even though delaying TKA and THA may lead to some cost savings in the short-run, the results from the study showed that this was not a cost-effective option. CONCLUSIONS: TKA and THA are cost-effective and should be recommended for the management of patients with end stage/severe knee and hip OA. However, there needs to be additional studies to assess the cost-effectiveness of other surgical interventions in order for definite conclusions to be reached.

Supervised neuromuscular exercise prior to hip and knee replacement: 12-month clinical effect and cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are indications of beneficial short-term effect of pre-operative exercise in reducing pain and improving activity of daily living after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. Though, information from studies conducting longer follow-ups and economic evaluations of exercise prior to THR and TKR is needed. The aim of the study was to analyse 12-month clinical effect and cost-utility of supervised neuromuscular exercise prior to THR and TKR surgery. METHODS: The study was conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial including 165 patients scheduled for standard THR or TKR at a hospital located in a rural area of Denmark. The patients were randomised to replacement surgery with or without an 8-week preoperative supervised neuromuscular exercise program (Clinical Trials registration no.: NCT01003756). Clinical effect was measured with Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were based on EQ-5D-3L and Danish preference weights. Resource use was extracted from national registries and valued using standard tariffs (2012-EUR). Incremental net benefit was analysed to estimate the probability for the intervention being cost effective for a range of threshold values. A health care sector perspective was applied. RESULTS: HOOS/KOOS quality of life [8.25 (95% CI, 0.42 to 16.10)] and QALYs [0.04 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.07)] were statistically significantly improved. Effect-sizes ranged between 0.09-0.59 for HOOS/KOOS subscales. Despite including an intervention cost of €326 per patient, there was no difference in total cost between groups [€132 (95% CI -3942 to 3679)]. At a threshold of €40,000, preoperative exercise was found to be cost effective at 84% probability. CONCLUSION: Preoperative supervised neuromuscular exercise for 8 weeks was found to be cost-effective in patients scheduled for THR and TKR surgery at conventional thresholds for willingness to pay. One-year clinical effects were small to moderate and favoured the intervention group, but only statistically significant for quality of life measures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01003756 ) October 28, 2009.

[Local Application of Tranexamic Acid in Total Hip Arthroplasty Decreases Blood Loss and Consumption of Blood Transfusion]. / Lokální aplikace kyseliny tranexamové u TEP kycle snizuje krevní ztráty a spotrebu krevních transfuzí.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The primary aim of our study was to identify the effects of local application of tranexamic acid (TXA, Exacyl) on the amount of postoperative blood loss and blood transfusion requirement in primary total hip arthroplasty. We also recorded the levels of postoperative haemoglobin and its drop in early period after surgery. In each patient, we monitored in detail the incidence of early complications (haematoma, wound exudate). Lastly, the economic aspect of TXA administration was also taken into account. MATERIAL AND METHODS The prospective study included a total of 312 patients (122 men and 190 women) undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) at our department between January 2012 and November 2015. The patients enrolled in the study were divided into the intervention group with local (intra-articular) application of TXA and the control group without using TXA. Each group had 156 patients. The mean age of patients in the group with TXA was 65.6 years and the most frequent indication for THA surgery was primary osteoarthritis (59.0 %). The groups did not show any differences in basic characteristics, which was statistically verified. In each patient the volume of postoperative drainage, total blood loss, including the hidden loss, was recorded. In postoperative period, we monitored the haemoglobin levels and haematocrit. On discharge of each patient from the hospital, the size and site of a haematoma, wound exudate if still present even after postoperative day 4 and early surgical revision were evaluated. RESULTS In the group with TXA the blood losses from drains were significantly lower compared to the control group (493.4 ± 357.1 ml vs. 777.3 ± 382.5 ml; p < 0.0001). The median value for total blood loss (i.e. drainage volume and hidden loss) in the group with TXA was by 29.5 % lower than the median in the group without TXA (689.2 vs. 977.1 ml). The mean total blood loss (intraoperative + postoperative) was 783.8 ± 478.6 ml (mean ± standard deviation) in the patients with TXA and 1079.7 ± 487.1 ml in the second group without TXA. The difference in the total blood loss volume was significant (p < 0.0001). In the group with TXA the consumption of blood transfusion was significantly lower by 50 % (20 vs. 40 units), (p = 0.0004). The patients with TXA also reported a significantly lower consumption of allogeneic blood (p = 0.004), a higher level of postoperative haemoglobin (p < 0.0001) and a lower mean drop of haemoglobin (p < 0.0001). We did not observe any significant differences in the incidence of haematomas (p = 0.644). No higher volume of wound drainage and joint swelling after postoperative day 4 in patients with TXA was found (p = 0.565; p = 0.242). The TXA group did not show a higher rate of surgical revision (p = 1.000). The total economic costs of blood transfusion requirements were significantly lower in the TXA group than in the control group (p = 0.004), including consumption of autologous transfusions and blood salvage (p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION The main effect of the local application of TXA is to reduce bleeding which should result in lower postoperative blood loss and consumption of allogenic blood transfusion. The advantage of the local application of TXA is its easy application and maximum concentration of TXA at the surgical site. In addition, a potential harm associated with a systemic administration of a higher TXA dose is reduced because of only minimal TXA resorption into the circulation. According to a number of recent studies, the local application of TXA achieves comparable results to its intravenous application. The economic benefit of TXA intervention is also worth considering. CONCLUSIONS The local application of TXA is an effective and, simultaneously, safe method to reduce perioperative blood loss and consumption of blood transfusions and also to decrease the costs of hospital stay in the patients after THA. Another advantage of the local application is the need to administer one dose only, whereas at least two doses need to be administered intravenously in order to achieve the same effect. No significant complications were observed in the patients with TXA. According to the recent literature, it is therefore appropriate to include the local application of TXA among the recommended procedures for THA, as is the case in total knee arthroplasty. Key words: tranexamic acid, local application, blood loss, hidden blood loss, THA, total hip arthroplasty, complications.