[Cost and Revenue Relationship in Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Patients in Relation to Body Mass Index]. / Kosten-Erlös-Verhältnis orthopädisch-unfallchirurgischer Patienten in Abhängigkeit vom Body-Mass-Index.

BACKGROUND: Growing numbers of patients in orthopaedic and trauma surgery are obese. The risks involved are e.g. surgical complications, higher costs for longer hospital stays or special operating tables. It is a moot point whether revenues in the German DRG system cover the individual costs in relation to patients' body mass index (BMI) and in which area of hospital care potentially higher costs occur. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data related to BMI, individual costs and revenues were extracted from the hospital information system for 13,833 patients of a large hospital who were operated in 2007 to 2010 on their upper or lower extremities. We analysed differences in cost revenue relations dependent on patients' BMI and surgical site, and differences in the distribution of hospital cost areas in relation to patients' BMI by t and U tests. RESULTS: Individual costs of morbidly obese (BMI ≥ 40) and underweight patients (BMI < 18.5) significantly (p < 0.05) exceeded individual DRG revenues. Significantly higher cost revenue relations were detected for all operations on the lower and upper extremities except for ankle joint surgeries in which arthroscopical procedures predominate. Most of the incremental costs resulted from higher spending for nursing care, medication and special appliances. Costs for doctors and medical ancillary staff did not increase in relation to patients' BMI. CONCLUSION: To avoid BMI related patient discrimination, supplementary fees to cover extra costs for morbidly obese or underweight patients with upper or lower extremities operations should raise DRG revenues. Moreover, hospitals should be organisationally prepared for these patients.

United Kingdom Frozen Shoulder Trial (UK FROST), multi-centre, randomised, 12 month, parallel group, superiority study to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of Early Structured Physiotherapy versus manipulation under anaesthesia versus arthroscopic capsular release for patients referred to secondary care with a primary frozen shoulder: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Frozen shoulder (also known as adhesive capsulitis) occurs when the capsule, or the soft tissue envelope around the ball and socket shoulder joint, becomes scarred and contracted, making the shoulder tight, painful and stiff. It affects around 1 in 12 men and 1 in 10 women of working age. Although this condition can settle with time (typically taking 1 to 3 years), for some people it causes severe symptoms and needs referral to hospital. Our aim is to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two invasive and costly surgical interventions that are commonly used in secondary care in the National Health Service (NHS) compared with a non-surgical comparator of Early Structured Physiotherapy. METHODS: We will conduct a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 500 adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of frozen shoulder, and who have radiographs that exclude other pathology. Early Structured Physiotherapy with an intra-articular steroid injection will be compared with manipulation under anaesthesia with a steroid injection or arthroscopic (keyhole) capsular release followed by manipulation. Both surgical interventions will be followed with a programme of post-procedural physiotherapy. These treatments will be undertaken in NHS hospitals across the United Kingdom. The primary outcome and endpoint will be the Oxford Shoulder Score (a patient self-reported assessment of shoulder function) at 12 months. This will also be measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months after randomisation; and on the day that treatment starts and 6 months later. Secondary outcomes include the Disabilities of Arm Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score, the EQ-5D-5 L score, pain, extent of recovery and complications. We will explore the acceptability of the different treatments to patients and health care professionals using qualitative methods. DISCUSSION: The three treatments being compared are the most frequently used in secondary care in the NHS, but there is uncertainty about which one works best and at what cost. UK FROST is a rigorously designed and adequately powered study to inform clinical decisions for the treatment of this common condition in adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register, ID: ISRCTN48804508 . Registered on 25 July 2014.

Treatment of Massive Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis.

Massive irreparable rotator cuff tears cause significant shoulder pain and dysfunction. Physical therapy (PT), arthroscopic debridement with biceps tenotomy (AD-BT), and hemiarthroplasty (HA) are treatments shown to reduce pain and improve quality of life. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a newer surgical treatment option that may offer improved function. A cost-effectiveness analysis of these interventions has never been performed, and no head-to-head comparative effectiveness trials currently exist. A Markov decision analytic model was used to compare RTSA, HA, AD-BT, and PT as treatments for elderly patients with massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. Probabilities for complications, perioperative death, conversion procedures, and reoperations were derived from the literature, and costs were determined by average Medicare reimbursement rates from 2011. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty yielded the most quality-adjusted life years (QALY) with 7.69, but greater benefits came at higher costs compared with other treatments. Sensitivity analyses showed that PT was the most cost-effective intervention at a health utility of 0.75 or greater (QALY 7.35). The health utility of RTSA was 0.72 or less (QALY 7.48) or RTSA probability of no complications was 0.83 or less (QALY 7.48 at cost of $23,830). Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty yielded benefits at a cost considered good value for money compared with other treatments. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is the preferred and most cost-effective treatment option for elderly patients with massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. For patients seeking pain relief without functional gains, AD-BT can be considered a cost-effective and cheaper alternative. The cost-effectiveness analysis approach can help guide clinical practice as well as the policies of health care systems and insurers. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(1):e65-e76.].

The cost-effectiveness of single-row compared with double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: Interest in double-row techniques for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair has increased over the last several years, presumably because of a combination of literature demonstrating superior biomechanical characteristics and recent improvements in instrumentation and technique. As a result of the increasing focus on value-based health-care delivery, orthopaedic surgeons must understand the cost implications of this practice. The purpose of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair compared with traditional single-row repair. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of double-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair compared with single-row repair on the basis of the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Two cohorts of patients (one with a tear of <3 cm and the other with a tear of ≥3 cm) were evaluated. Probabilities for retear and persistent symptoms, health utilities for the particular health states, and the direct costs for rotator cuff repair were derived from the orthopaedic literature and institutional data. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for double-row compared with single-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was $571,500 for rotator cuff tears of <3 cm and $460,200 for rotator cuff tears of ≥3 cm. The rate of radiographic or symptomatic retear alone did not influence cost-effectiveness results. If the increase in the cost of double-row repair was less than $287 for small or moderate tears and less than $352 for large or massive tears compared with the cost of single-row repair, then double-row repair would represent a cost-effective surgical alternative. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of currently available data, double-row rotator cuff repair is not cost-effective for any size rotator cuff tears. However, variability in the values for costs and probability of retear can have a profound effect on the results of the model and may create an environment in which double-row repair becomes the more cost-effective surgical option. The identification of the threshold values in this study may help surgeons to determine the most cost-effective treatment.

[An empirical analysis of patients' preference of setting for outpatient arthroscopic surgery]. / Ambulantes Operieren: Praxis oder Krankenhaus? Eine empirische Analyse von Bevölkerungspräferenzen für die Wahl des Behandlungssettings.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate patient preferences of setting for outpatient surgery--office-based, hospital-based, or inpatient care environment--and the factors relevant to their decision. METHODS: Preferences were elicited from a sample of the general population (n=1,134) with a discrete choice model, an efficient technique for estimating utility. Participants chose their preferred mode among different outpatient scenarios for hypothetical arthroscopic surgery. RESULTS: The subjects were open to alternative options of care delivery and based their decisions on particular attributes, "specialization," "staff continuity," and "waiting time" having the largest effect on choices. A slight preference for hospital-based outpatient surgery was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results show that patients' choice of providers is open and based on specific attributes of treatment delivery and institution and not the setting per se.

[Comparison of cost-effectiveness in knee arthroscopy performed under local, general intravenous and spinal anesthesia]. / Porównanie kosztów wykonania artroskopii stawu kolanowego w znieczuleniu miejscowym, przewodowym (podpajeczynówkowym) i ogólnym dozylnym.

The study was performed to compare cost-effectiveness between local, regional (epidural) and general i.v. anesthesia in outpatient knee arthroscopy. The 520 outpatient diagnostic arthroscopy were performed in witch 443 underwent operative part. The cost of ambulatory surgery unit was 900 PLN/hour, postanesthesia care unit and care unit 315 PLN/hour each. The cost of local anesthesia 39 PLN, regional one 44 PLN and general one 58 PLN. The total cost of arthroscopy performed in local anesthesia, general and regional ones were respectively 1264, 1296 and 1567 PLN. Local anesthesia in 520 arthroscopies produces savings of 16667 and 157877 PLN comparing to general anesthesia and regional one. The biggest part of the costs in all types of anesthesia was ambulatory surgery unit cost and postanesthesia care unit cost which appears only in epidural anesthesia.

Knee arthroscopy with different anesthesia methods: a comparison of efficacy and cost.

To evaluate the cost and time effectiveness for different anesthesia methods when performing knee arthroscopy, this study compared three different anesthesia methods. Four hundred healthy patients scheduled for knee arthroscopy were randomized to either local anesthesia (LA) (n=200), spinal anesthesia (SA) (n=100) or general anesthesia (GA) (n=100). The LA arthroscopies were performed in a facility set up in our outpatient department without anesthesia service. The SA and GA arthroscopies were performed in our central operating department with full anesthesia service. Comparisons were made between total hospital stay, anesthesia time, surgery time, recovery time, pharmaceutical and total cost. The total hospital time was 130.4 min (SD 35.14, range 63-383) in the LA group compared to 280.4 min (SD 79.29, range 155-589) in the GA group (p<0.001). The total hospital time in the GA group was also shorter than that of 350.3 min (SD 65.37, range 198-502) in the SA group (p<0.001). The time from start of anesthesia to start of surgery was significantly longer in the LA group, 39.2 min (SD 13.13, range 17-87), compared to 20.1 min (SD 4.93, range 11-35) in the SA group and to 17.6 min (SD 4.64, range 9-44) in the GA group. There were no differences in the surgery time for the three groups. The use of LA was shown to save SEK 1011 (Swedish Crowns) per patient compared to SA and GA.

[Diagnostic knee arthroscopy under local anesthesia in hospital. An assessment of the diagnostic reliability, course of the treatment and health care costs]. / Diagnostisk knaeartroskopi i lokalbedøvelse på sygehus. En vurdering af den diagnostiske sikkerhed, behandlingsforløbet og sundhedsvaesenets økonomi.

INTRODUCTION: Outpatient knee arthroscopy under local analgesia can be performed solely as a diagnostic procedure. The aim was to estimate the diagnostic precision of such arthroscopy as compared to the diagnosis made during a secondary therapeutic operation, and to describe the flow of patients and the costs of this treatment strategy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The records of 371 consecutive patients, who had a diagnostic knee arthroscopy performed under local analgesia, were reviewed retrospectively. The diagnosis made during the diagnostic arthroscopy (371 patients) and a later therapeutic operation (135 patients) were extracted and the patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire. RESULTS: The diagnostic arthroscopy could not be completed in 11 cases. No further operation was necessary in 188 patients. A secondary therapeutic operation was performed in 135 patients. In only 54% of these was the same diagnosis made during the diagnostic and the therapeutic operations. Only half of the 278 patients (75%) who returned the questionnaire, found that the diagnostic procedure had been pain free. DISCUSSION: With respect to the costs, the diagnostic arthroscopy cannot be recommended. Most economic was the strategy in which the diagnostic and therapeutic operations were performed together as an outpatient procedure. The relatively poor diagnostic precision of arthroscopy is surprising and should be kept in mind when patients continue to have unexplained complaints in the knee, despite a normal arthroscopy.

Knee arthroscopy: a cost analysis of general and local anesthesia.

A cost analysis of outpatient knee arthroscopy was performed on 53 patients to determine if cost savings were associated with local versus general anesthesia. Local anesthesia was associated with an average reduction in overall charges of $600 compared with general anesthesia because of the reduction of charges related to the recovery room and anesthesia equipment. This study demonstrates a reduction in the hospital charges associated with outpatient knee arthroscopy when local rather than general anesthetic technique is used.

Local anesthesia for knee arthroscopy. Efficacy and cost benefits.

We performed a retrospective review of a series of knee arthroscopic procedures that were completed using local, general, or regional anesthesia to evaluate the efficacy of these anesthetic techniques. Operative time, complications or failures, procedures successfully performed, recovery room time and postoperative stay, and patient satisfaction were recorded. Local anesthesia with intravenous sedation compared favorably with the other techniques: operative time was not increased, a large variety of operative procedures were successfully completed, recovery time was significantly shortened, and patient satisfaction remained high. This technique offers several advantages over other types of anesthesia for knee arthroscopy, including improved cost effectiveness.

[Knee arthroscopy under local anesthesia with or without anesthesiologic assistance. A cost-benefit analysis]. / Knaeledsartroskopi i lokalanaestesi med eller uden anaestesiologisk assistance. En omkostnings-effekt-analyse.

The benefit of anaesthesiological assistance during arthroscopy of the knee in local anaesthesia was evaluated in a cost-effectiveness analysis. One hundred consecutive patients had arthroscopy of the knee performed in local anaesthesia without anesthesiological assistance. In 15% of the cases the arthroscopy was insufficient because of pain reaction. Sixteen percent of the patients indicated that they would prefer general anaesthesia for a similar procedure in the future. The costs for arthroscopy of the knee in local anaesthesia without anaesthesiological assistance were calculated to Dkr. 2055. The amount includes costs for rearthroscopy in local anaesthesia with anaesthesiological assistance for 15% of the patients. Thirty-three patients had arthroscopy of the knee done in local anaesthesia with anaesthesiological assistance. General anaesthesia was needed for twelve percent of the patients. The cost for this procedure, including the costs of possible general anaesthesia were calculated to Dkr. 2458. Any significant difference in the sensation of pain during the arthroscopy could not be demonstrated between the two groups. Based on this study it is recommended that arthroscopy of the knee in local anaesthesia is planned without anaesthesiological assistance.

Office arthroscopy: a diagnostic alternative.

Twenty patients with enigmatic knee symptoms were selected for evaluation by both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and office arthroscopy. Office arthroscopy was performed in a standard examination room using a miniature (1.7 mm) fiberoptic arthroscope under local anesthesia. All MRI scans were performed on a state-of-the-art 1.5-T magnet unit, and included specialized cartilage sequences in 7 patients. In 14 patients, 26 areas showed articular cartilage changes by arthroscopy (grade 2-3). Only nine of these areas were detected by MRI (sensitivity 34.6%). There were five false-positive and four false-negative readings of meniscal tears by MRI as compared with office arthroscopy. These results improved when postoperative menisci were excluded. Only one of three anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) disruptions identified by MRI could be verified by arthroscopy. The one posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) disruption was confirmed by both techniques. MRI was superior to arthroscopy in identifying bone contusions, subchondral sclerosis, and medial cruciate ligament (MCL) sprains. Office arthroscopy is an accurate and cost-efficient alternative to MRI in diagnostic evaluation of knee pathology in patients with enigmatic symptomatology.