Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Decision-making with regard to the treatment of humeral shaft fractures remains under debate. The cost-effectiveness of these treatment options has yet to be established. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of operative treatment with that of nonoperative treatment of humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: We developed a decision tree for treatment options. Surgical costs included the ambulatory surgical fee, physician fee, anesthesia fee, and, in the sensitivity analysis, lost wages during recovery. We used the Current Procedural Terminology codes from the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery to determine physician fees via the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services database. The anesthesia fee was obtained from the national conversion factor and mean operative time for included procedures. We obtained data on mean wages from the U.S. Bureau of Labor and data on weeks missed from a similar study. We reported functional data via the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores obtained from existing literature. We used rollback analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to determine the cost-effectiveness of each treatment option, presented in dollars per meaningful change in DASH score, utilizing a $50,000 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. RESULTS: The cost per meaningful change in DASH score for operative treatment was $18,857.97 at the 6-month follow-up and $25,756.36 at the 1-year follow-up, by Monte Carlo simulation. Wage loss-inclusive models revealed values that fall even farther below the WTP threshold, making operative management the more cost-effective treatment option compared with nonoperative treatment in both settings. With an upward variation of the nonoperative union rate to 84.17% in the wage-exclusive model and 89.43% in the wage-inclusive model, nonoperative treatment instead became more cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Operative management was cost-effective at both 6 months and 1 year, compared with nonoperative treatment, in both models. Operative treatment was found to be even more cost-effective with loss of wages considered, suggesting that an earlier return to baseline function and, thus, return to work are important considerations in making operative treatment the more cost-effective option. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cost-Effectiveness of Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy and Physical Therapy for Degenerative Meniscal Tear.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for concomitant meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis (OA) involving arthroscopic partial meniscectomy surgery and physical therapy (PT). METHODS: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated Monte Carlo microsimulation, to compare three strategies, 1) PT-only, 2) immediate surgery, and 3) PT + optional surgery, for participants whose pain persists following initial PT. We modeled a cohort with baseline meniscal tear, OA, and demographics from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus PT. We estimated risks and costs of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy complications and accounted for heightened OA progression post surgery using published data. We estimated surgery use rates and treatment efficacies using MeTeOR data. We considered a 5-year time horizon, discounted costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) 3% per year and conducted sensitivity analyses. We report incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. RESULTS: Relative to PT-only, PT + optional surgery added 0.0651 QALY and $2,010 over 5 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $30,900 per QALY). Relative to PT + optional surgery, immediate surgery added 0.0065 QALY and $3080 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $473,800 per QALY). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were sensitive to optional surgery efficacy in the PT + optional surgery strategy. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PT + optional surgery was cost-effective in 51% of simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of both $50,000 per QALY and $100,000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: First-line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy has a prohibitively high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Under base case assumptions, second-line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy offered to participants with persistent pain following initial PT is cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds between $31,000 and $473,000 per QALY. Our analyses suggest that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy can be a high-value treatment option for patients with meniscal tear and OA when performed following an initial PT course and should remain a covered treatment option.

MRI-based assessment of proximal femur strength compared to mechanical testing.

Half of the women who sustain a hip fracture would not qualify for osteoporosis treatment based on current DXA-estimated bone mineral density criteria. Therefore, a better approach is needed to determine if an individual is at risk of hip fracture from a fall. The objective of this study was to determine the association between radiation-free MRI-derived bone strength and strain simulations compared to results from direct mechanical testing of cadaveric femora. Imaging was conducted on a 3-Tesla MRI scanner using two sequences: one balanced steady-state free precession sequence with 300 µm isotropic voxel size and one spoiled gradient echo with anisotropic voxel size of 234 × 234 × 1500 µm. Femora were dissected free of soft-tissue and 4350-ohm strain-gauges were securely applied to surfaces at the femoral shaft, inferior neck, greater trochanter, and superior neck. Cadavers were mechanically tested with a hydraulic universal test frame to simulate loading in a sideways fall orientation. Sideways fall forces were simulated on MRI-based finite element meshes and bone stiffness, failure force, and force for plastic deformation were computed. Simulated bone strength metrics from the 300 µm isotropic sequence showed strong agreement with experimentally obtained values of bone strength, with stiffness (r = 0.88, p = 0.0002), plastic deformation point (r = 0.89, p < 0.0001), and failure force (r = 0.92, p < 0.0001). The anisotropic sequence showed similar trends for stiffness, plastic deformation point, and failure force (r = 0.68, 0.70, 0.84; p = 0.02, 0.01, 0.0006, respectively). Surface strain-gauge measurements showed moderate to strong agreement with simulated magnitude strain values at the greater trochanter, superior neck, and inferior neck (r = -0.97, -0.86, 0.80; p ≤0.0001, 0.003, 0.03, respectively). The findings from this study support the use of MRI-based FE analysis of the hip to reliably predict the mechanical competence of the human femur in clinical settings.