Cargando…

Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of alternative brands of prosthesis for total knee replacement (TKR). We compared patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, and costs, and estimated the relative cost-effectiveness of five frequently used cemented br...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pennington, Mark, Grieve, Richard, Black, Nick, van der Meulen, Jan H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4778929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26943789
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150074
_version_ 1782419556191436800
author Pennington, Mark
Grieve, Richard
Black, Nick
van der Meulen, Jan H.
author_facet Pennington, Mark
Grieve, Richard
Black, Nick
van der Meulen, Jan H.
author_sort Pennington, Mark
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of alternative brands of prosthesis for total knee replacement (TKR). We compared patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, and costs, and estimated the relative cost-effectiveness of five frequently used cemented brands of unconstrained prostheses with fixed bearings (PFC Sigma, AGC Biomet, Nexgen, Genesis 2, and Triathlon). METHODS: We used data from three national databases for patients who had a TKR between 2003 and 2012, to estimate the effect of prosthesis brand on post-operative quality of life (QOL) (EQ-5D-3L) in 53 126 patients at six months. We compared TKR revision rates by brand over 10 years for 239 945 patients. We used a fully probabilistic Markov model to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and the probability that each prosthesis brand is the most cost effective at alternative thresholds of willingness-to-pay for a QALY gain. FINDINGS: Revision rates were lowest with the Nexgen and PFC Sigma (2.5% after 10 years in 70-year-old women). Average lifetime costs were lowest with the AGC Biomet (£9 538); mean post-operative QOL was highest with the Nexgen, which was the most cost-effective brand across all patient subgroups. For example, for 70-year-old men and women, the ICERs for the Nexgen compared to the AGC Biomet were £2 300 per QALY. At realistic cost per QALY thresholds (£10 000 to £30 000), the probabilities that the Nexgen is the most cost-effective brand are about 98%. These results were robust to alternative modelling assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: AGC Biomet prostheses are the least costly cemented unconstrained fixed brand for TKR but Nexgen prostheses lead to improved patient outcomes, at low additional cost. These results suggest that Nexgen should be considered as a first choice prosthesis for patients with osteoarthritis who require a TKR.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4778929
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47789292016-03-23 Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset Pennington, Mark Grieve, Richard Black, Nick van der Meulen, Jan H. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: There is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of alternative brands of prosthesis for total knee replacement (TKR). We compared patient-reported outcomes, revision rates, and costs, and estimated the relative cost-effectiveness of five frequently used cemented brands of unconstrained prostheses with fixed bearings (PFC Sigma, AGC Biomet, Nexgen, Genesis 2, and Triathlon). METHODS: We used data from three national databases for patients who had a TKR between 2003 and 2012, to estimate the effect of prosthesis brand on post-operative quality of life (QOL) (EQ-5D-3L) in 53 126 patients at six months. We compared TKR revision rates by brand over 10 years for 239 945 patients. We used a fully probabilistic Markov model to estimate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and the probability that each prosthesis brand is the most cost effective at alternative thresholds of willingness-to-pay for a QALY gain. FINDINGS: Revision rates were lowest with the Nexgen and PFC Sigma (2.5% after 10 years in 70-year-old women). Average lifetime costs were lowest with the AGC Biomet (£9 538); mean post-operative QOL was highest with the Nexgen, which was the most cost-effective brand across all patient subgroups. For example, for 70-year-old men and women, the ICERs for the Nexgen compared to the AGC Biomet were £2 300 per QALY. At realistic cost per QALY thresholds (£10 000 to £30 000), the probabilities that the Nexgen is the most cost-effective brand are about 98%. These results were robust to alternative modelling assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: AGC Biomet prostheses are the least costly cemented unconstrained fixed brand for TKR but Nexgen prostheses lead to improved patient outcomes, at low additional cost. These results suggest that Nexgen should be considered as a first choice prosthesis for patients with osteoarthritis who require a TKR. Public Library of Science 2016-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4778929/ /pubmed/26943789 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150074 Text en © 2016 Pennington et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Pennington, Mark
Grieve, Richard
Black, Nick
van der Meulen, Jan H.
Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset
title Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset
title_full Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset
title_fullStr Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset
title_full_unstemmed Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset
title_short Cost-Effectiveness of Five Commonly Used Prosthesis Brands for Total Knee Replacement in the UK: A Study Using the NJR Dataset
title_sort cost-effectiveness of five commonly used prosthesis brands for total knee replacement in the uk: a study using the njr dataset
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4778929/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26943789
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150074
work_keys_str_mv AT penningtonmark costeffectivenessoffivecommonlyusedprosthesisbrandsfortotalkneereplacementintheukastudyusingthenjrdataset
AT grieverichard costeffectivenessoffivecommonlyusedprosthesisbrandsfortotalkneereplacementintheukastudyusingthenjrdataset
AT blacknick costeffectivenessoffivecommonlyusedprosthesisbrandsfortotalkneereplacementintheukastudyusingthenjrdataset
AT vandermeulenjanh costeffectivenessoffivecommonlyusedprosthesisbrandsfortotalkneereplacementintheukastudyusingthenjrdataset