Cargando…

Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?

BACKGROUND: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM HRA) may offer potential advantages over total hip arthroplasty (THA) for certain patients with advanced osteoarthritis of the hip. However, the cost effectiveness of MoM HRA compared with THA is unclear. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bozic, Kevin J., Pui, Christine M., Ludeman, Matthew J., Vail, Thomas P., Silverstein, Marc D.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2914258/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20232182
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1301-0
_version_ 1782184746183294976
author Bozic, Kevin J.
Pui, Christine M.
Ludeman, Matthew J.
Vail, Thomas P.
Silverstein, Marc D.
author_facet Bozic, Kevin J.
Pui, Christine M.
Ludeman, Matthew J.
Vail, Thomas P.
Silverstein, Marc D.
author_sort Bozic, Kevin J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM HRA) may offer potential advantages over total hip arthroplasty (THA) for certain patients with advanced osteoarthritis of the hip. However, the cost effectiveness of MoM HRA compared with THA is unclear. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MoM HRA to THA. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed to compare the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs associated with HRA versus THA from the healthcare system perspective over a 30-year time horizon. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of patient characteristics, clinical outcome probabilities, quality of life and costs on the discounted incremental costs, incremental clinical effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of HRA compared to THA. RESULTS: MoM HRA was associated with modest improvements in QALYs at a small incremental cost, and had an ICER less than $50,000 per QALY gained for men younger than 65 and for women younger than 55. MoM HRA and THA failure rates, device costs, and the difference in quality of life after conversion from HRA to THA compared to primary THA had the largest impact on costs and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: MoM HRA could be clinically advantageous and cost-effective in younger men and women. Further research on the comparative effectiveness of MoM HRA versus THA should include assessments of the quality of life and resource use in addition to the clinical outcomes associated with both procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, economic and decision analysis. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
format Text
id pubmed-2914258
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29142582010-08-09 Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications? Bozic, Kevin J. Pui, Christine M. Ludeman, Matthew J. Vail, Thomas P. Silverstein, Marc D. Clin Orthop Relat Res Symposium: Complications of Hip Arthroplasty BACKGROUND: Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoM HRA) may offer potential advantages over total hip arthroplasty (THA) for certain patients with advanced osteoarthritis of the hip. However, the cost effectiveness of MoM HRA compared with THA is unclear. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MoM HRA to THA. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed to compare the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs associated with HRA versus THA from the healthcare system perspective over a 30-year time horizon. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of patient characteristics, clinical outcome probabilities, quality of life and costs on the discounted incremental costs, incremental clinical effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of HRA compared to THA. RESULTS: MoM HRA was associated with modest improvements in QALYs at a small incremental cost, and had an ICER less than $50,000 per QALY gained for men younger than 65 and for women younger than 55. MoM HRA and THA failure rates, device costs, and the difference in quality of life after conversion from HRA to THA compared to primary THA had the largest impact on costs and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: MoM HRA could be clinically advantageous and cost-effective in younger men and women. Further research on the comparative effectiveness of MoM HRA versus THA should include assessments of the quality of life and resource use in addition to the clinical outcomes associated with both procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, economic and decision analysis. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. Springer-Verlag 2010-03-16 2010-09 /pmc/articles/PMC2914258/ /pubmed/20232182 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1301-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Symposium: Complications of Hip Arthroplasty
Bozic, Kevin J.
Pui, Christine M.
Ludeman, Matthew J.
Vail, Thomas P.
Silverstein, Marc D.
Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?
title Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?
title_full Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?
title_fullStr Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?
title_full_unstemmed Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?
title_short Do the Potential Benefits of Metal-on-Metal Hip Resurfacing Justify the Increased Cost and Risk of Complications?
title_sort do the potential benefits of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing justify the increased cost and risk of complications?
topic Symposium: Complications of Hip Arthroplasty
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2914258/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20232182
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1301-0
work_keys_str_mv AT bozickevinj dothepotentialbenefitsofmetalonmetalhipresurfacingjustifytheincreasedcostandriskofcomplications
AT puichristinem dothepotentialbenefitsofmetalonmetalhipresurfacingjustifytheincreasedcostandriskofcomplications
AT ludemanmatthewj dothepotentialbenefitsofmetalonmetalhipresurfacingjustifytheincreasedcostandriskofcomplications
AT vailthomasp dothepotentialbenefitsofmetalonmetalhipresurfacingjustifytheincreasedcostandriskofcomplications
AT silversteinmarcd dothepotentialbenefitsofmetalonmetalhipresurfacingjustifytheincreasedcostandriskofcomplications