Literature DB >> 20225995

Knee-attributable medical costs and risk of re-surgery among patients utilizing non-surgical treatment options for knee arthrofibrosis in a managed care population.

Judith J Stephenson1, Ralph A Quimbo, Tao Gu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if differences in costs and risks of re-hospitalization and/or re-operation exist between arthrofibrosis patients treated with low intensity stretch (LIS) or high intensity stretch (HIS) mechanical therapies, or physical therapy alone (No Device). STUDY
DESIGN: This observational cohort study utilized administrative claims data to identify arthrofibrosis patients, age <65 years, with continuous enrollment for the 6 months prior to and following the index knee event date.
METHODS: The index knee event was defined as the knee injury/surgery preceding device use for the LIS and HIS groups and the knee injury/surgery prior to the diagnosis of arthrofibrosis for the No Device group. Knee-attributable medical costs (KAMC), accrued over 6-month pre- and post-index periods, as well as risks of re-operation, re-injury, and re-hospitalization were compared between groups. Multivariate models were used to evaluate group differences in utilization and costs when controlling for age, sex, and comorbidities.
RESULTS: A total of 60 359 patients (143 HIS; 607 LIS; 59 609 No Device) met the inclusion criteria. Unadjusted post-index KAMC were significantly less (p < 0.0001) among HIS patients ($8213 +/- 10 576) relative to LIS ($16 861 +/- 17 857) and No Device ($9345 +/- 14 120) patients. A significantly greater percentage of LIS Device patients had total knee replacements than HIS Device or No Device patients, and the LIS group had a significantly higher percentage of patients with musculoskeletal disease. When controlling for these group differences, the multivariate predictive model results were similar to the unadjusted results, with greater post-index KAMC for the LIS patients (24%, p = 0.025) and No Device (9%, p = 0.323) relative to HIS patients. No Device patients were 71% (p < 0.0001) more likely to have a subsequent knee event than HIS patients, and HIS patients had significantly lower rates of re-hospitalization than LIS and No Device patients (p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with HIS mechanical therapy demonstrated significantly reduced rates of re-hospitalization which corresponded to reduced knee-attributable medical costs. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this study include those inherent in the use of retrospective claims data to identify the cohorts and for analytic purposes. The authors attempted to control for these as much as possible with the multivariate analyses, and inclusion of the model covariates specified above demonstrated a scaled deviance of 1.16 indicating a reasonable goodness-of-fit for the selected model covariates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20225995     DOI: 10.1185/03007991003676479

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Med Res Opin        ISSN: 0300-7995            Impact factor:   2.580


  7 in total

1.  Efficacy of non-operative treatment of patients with knee arthrofibrosis using high-intensity home mechanical therapy: a retrospective review of 11,000+ patients.

Authors:  Shaun K Stinton; Samantha J Beckley; Thomas P Branch
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 2.677

2.  The STAK tool: evaluation of a new device to treat arthrofibrosis and poor range of movement following total knee arthroplasty and major knee surgery.

Authors:  Sara K Aspinall; Patrick C Wheeler; Steven P Godsiff; Sue M Hignett; Daniel T P Fong
Journal:  Bone Jt Open       Date:  2020-08-01

3.  Arthrofibrosis following primary total hip arthroplasty: a distinct clinical entity.

Authors:  Thorsten Gehrke; Lara Althaus; Philip Linke; Jochen Salber; Veit Krenn; Mustafa Citak
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-05-09       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Factors that influence the efficacy of stretching programs for patients with hypomobility.

Authors:  Cale A Jacobs; Aaron D Sciascia
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.843

5.  High-intensity mechanical therapy for loss of knee extension for worker's compensation and non-compensation patients.

Authors:  Amanda L Dempsey; Thomas P Branch; Timothy Mills; Robert M Karsch
Journal:  Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol       Date:  2010-10-12

6.  Medical stretching devices are effective in the treatment of knee arthrofibrosis: A systematic review.

Authors:  Sara K Aspinall; Zoe A Bamber; Sue M Hignett; Steven P Godsiff; Patrick C Wheeler; Daniel T P Fong
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Intra-articular celecoxib improves knee extension regardless of surgical release in a rabbit model of arthrofibrosis.

Authors:  William H Trousdale; Afton K Limberg; Nicolas Reina; Christopher G Salib; Roman Thaler; Amel Dudakovic; Daniel J Berry; Mark E Morrey; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo; Andre van Wijnen; Matthew P Abdel
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 5.853

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.