Cargando…

Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Cost analysis studies in medicine were uncommon in the past, but with the rising importance of financial considerations, it has become increasingly important to use available resources most efficiently. PURPOSE: To analyze the current state of cost-effectiveness analyses in shoulder surg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tischer, Thomas, Lenz, Robert, Breinlinger-O’Reilly, Jochen, Lutter, Christoph
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7223215/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32435659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120917121
_version_ 1783533719426957312
author Tischer, Thomas
Lenz, Robert
Breinlinger-O’Reilly, Jochen
Lutter, Christoph
author_facet Tischer, Thomas
Lenz, Robert
Breinlinger-O’Reilly, Jochen
Lutter, Christoph
author_sort Tischer, Thomas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cost analysis studies in medicine were uncommon in the past, but with the rising importance of financial considerations, it has become increasingly important to use available resources most efficiently. PURPOSE: To analyze the current state of cost-effectiveness analyses in shoulder surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review of the current literature was performed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All full economic analyses published since January 1, 2010 and including the terms “cost analysis” and “shoulder” were checked for usability. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence and established health economic criteria (Quality of Health Economic Studies [QHES] instrument). RESULTS: A total of 34 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with older studies, recent studies were of better quality: one level 1 study and eight level 2 studies were included. The mean QHES score was 87 of 100. The thematic focus of most studies (n = 13) was rotator cuff tears, with the main findings as follows: (1) magnetic resonance imaging is a cost-effective imaging strategy, (2) primary (arthroscopic) rotator cuff repair (RCR) with conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in case of failure is the most cost-effective strategy, (3) the platelet-rich plasma augmentation of RCR seems not to be cost-effective, and (4) the cost-effectiveness of double-row RCR remains unclear. Other studies included shoulder instability (n = 3), glenohumeral osteoarthritis (n = 3), proximal humeral fractures (n = 4), subacromial impingement (n = 4), and other shoulder conditions (n = 7). CONCLUSION: Compared with prior studies, the quality of recently available studies has improved significantly. Current studies could help decision makers to appropriately and adequately allocate resources. The optimal use of financial resources will be of increasing importance to improve medical care for patients. However, further studies are still necessary.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7223215
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72232152020-05-20 Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review Tischer, Thomas Lenz, Robert Breinlinger-O’Reilly, Jochen Lutter, Christoph Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Cost analysis studies in medicine were uncommon in the past, but with the rising importance of financial considerations, it has become increasingly important to use available resources most efficiently. PURPOSE: To analyze the current state of cost-effectiveness analyses in shoulder surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review of the current literature was performed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All full economic analyses published since January 1, 2010 and including the terms “cost analysis” and “shoulder” were checked for usability. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence and established health economic criteria (Quality of Health Economic Studies [QHES] instrument). RESULTS: A total of 34 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with older studies, recent studies were of better quality: one level 1 study and eight level 2 studies were included. The mean QHES score was 87 of 100. The thematic focus of most studies (n = 13) was rotator cuff tears, with the main findings as follows: (1) magnetic resonance imaging is a cost-effective imaging strategy, (2) primary (arthroscopic) rotator cuff repair (RCR) with conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in case of failure is the most cost-effective strategy, (3) the platelet-rich plasma augmentation of RCR seems not to be cost-effective, and (4) the cost-effectiveness of double-row RCR remains unclear. Other studies included shoulder instability (n = 3), glenohumeral osteoarthritis (n = 3), proximal humeral fractures (n = 4), subacromial impingement (n = 4), and other shoulder conditions (n = 7). CONCLUSION: Compared with prior studies, the quality of recently available studies has improved significantly. Current studies could help decision makers to appropriately and adequately allocate resources. The optimal use of financial resources will be of increasing importance to improve medical care for patients. However, further studies are still necessary. SAGE Publications 2020-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7223215/ /pubmed/32435659 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120917121 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Tischer, Thomas
Lenz, Robert
Breinlinger-O’Reilly, Jochen
Lutter, Christoph
Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review
title Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review
title_full Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review
title_short Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review
title_sort cost analysis in shoulder surgery: a systematic review
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7223215/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32435659
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120917121
work_keys_str_mv AT tischerthomas costanalysisinshouldersurgeryasystematicreview
AT lenzrobert costanalysisinshouldersurgeryasystematicreview
AT breinlingeroreillyjochen costanalysisinshouldersurgeryasystematicreview
AT lutterchristoph costanalysisinshouldersurgeryasystematicreview