Literature DB >> 23759892

Using patient-reported outcome measures to estimate cost-effectiveness of hip replacements in English hospitals.

John Appleby1, Emmi Poteliakhoff, Koonal Shah, Nancy Devlin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the average cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained from hip surgery, and to examine the variation in that between hospitals.
DESIGN: The transformation of patient-reported outcome measures (EQ-5D data) into QALYs, covering 25,463 NHS patient episodes between April 2009 and August 2010 from hospitals in England, using a model of future health change arising from a hip operation compared to a counterfactual of no operation. Hospital-level costs for hip procedures from the National Reference Costs data-set was used to calculate the hospitals' cost per QALY.
SETTING: English hospitals treating NHS-funded patients undergoing hip replacement. PARTICIPANTS: NHS-funded patients undergoing primary hip replacement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Cost per QALY.
RESULTS: Assuming some degradation in patients' health over the lifetime of the hip prosthesis, average health gain arising from a hip operation was 2.77 QALYs. For procedures paid for by the NHS but carried out in the independent sector the average gain was 2.97 QALYs. Average NHS hospital hip procedure costs were estimated to be £5844. The unweighted average cost per QALY for NHS hospitals was £2128. There were significant variations in cost per QALY between hospitals; most of this variation appears to be driven by variations in cost, not QALYs.
CONCLUSIONS: Using the new patient-assessed health-related quality of life data combined with routine hospital-level cost data it is possible to estimate a procedure-based measure of efficiency for hospitals. The fact that variations in cost per QALY are strongly driven by variations in cost suggests that further work is needed to investigate the causes of cost variations per se--especially the quality of routine NHS cost data.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cost effectiveness; cost per QALY; health economics; hip replacement; orthopaedics; patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23759892      PMCID: PMC3725858          DOI: 10.1177/0141076813489678

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J R Soc Med        ISSN: 0141-0768            Impact factor:   5.344


  8 in total

Review 1.  EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group.

Authors:  R Rabin; F de Charro
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.709

2.  Cost-outcome analysis of joint replacement: evidence from a Spanish public hospital.

Authors:  José Luis Navarro Espigares; Elisa Hernández Torres
Journal:  Gac Sanit       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.139

3.  Late response to patient-reported outcome questionnaires after surgery was associated with worse outcome.

Authors:  Andrew Hutchings; Kirstin Grosse Frie; Jenny Neuburger; Jan van der Meulen; Nick Black
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Cost-effectiveness analyses of elective orthopaedic surgical procedures in patients with inflammatory arthropathies.

Authors:  H Osnes-Ringen; M K Kvamme; I S Kristiansen; M Thingstad; J E Henriksen; T K Kvien; H Dagfinrud
Journal:  Scand J Rheumatol       Date:  2011-01-17       Impact factor: 3.641

5.  Truly inefficient or providing better quality of care? Analysing the relationship between risk-adjusted hospital costs and patients' health outcomes.

Authors:  Nils Gutacker; Chris Bojke; Silvio Daidone; Nancy J Devlin; David Parkin; Andrew Street
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 3.046

6.  Searching for a threshold, not setting one: the role of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

Authors:  Anthony Culyer; Christopher McCabe; Andrew Briggs; Karl Claxton; Martin Buxton; Ron Akehurst; Mark Sculpher; John Brazier
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  2007-01

7.  The economic benefit of hip replacement: a 5-year follow-up of costs and outcomes in the Exeter Primary Outcomes Study.

Authors:  Richard Fordham; Jane Skinner; Xia Wang; John Nolan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-05-25       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Factors associated with non-response in routine use of patient reported outcome measures after elective surgery in England.

Authors:  Andrew Hutchings; Jenny Neuburger; Kirstin Grosse Frie; Nick Black; Jan van der Meulen
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 3.186

  8 in total
  10 in total

1.  The Irish Cost-Effectiveness Threshold: Does it Support Rational Rationing or Might it Lead to Unintended Harm to Ireland's Health System?

Authors:  James F O'Mahony; Diarmuid Coughlan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Technology assessment and cost-effectiveness in orthopedics: how to measure outcomes and deliver value in a constantly changing healthcare environment.

Authors:  Jeremy M Burnham; Fabien Meta; Vincent Lizzio; Eric C Makhni; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-06

3.  NICE's cost-effectiveness range: should it be lowered?

Authors:  J P Raftery
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  First steps in PROMs and PREMs collection in Wales as part of the prudent and value-based healthcare agenda.

Authors:  Kathleen Withers; Robert Palmer; Sally Lewis; Grace Carolan-Rees
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2020-11-29       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  Do Patient- and Parent-reported Outcomes Measures for Children With Congenital Hand Differences Capture WHO-ICF Domains?

Authors:  Joshua M Adkinson; Rebecca S Bickham; Kevin C Chung; Jennifer F Waljee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  PROMs in total knee replacement: analysis of negative outcomes.

Authors:  F Begum; A Panagiotidou; C Park; T Ashdown; S El-Tawil
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  Cost-effectiveness of ranibizumab versus aflibercept in the treatment of visual impairment due to diabetic macular edema: a UK healthcare perspective.

Authors:  Stephane A Régnier; William Malcolm; Jennifer Haig; Weiguang Xue
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2015-05-06

8.  Properties of the EQ-5D-5L when prospective longitudinal data from 28,902 total hip arthroplasty procedures are applied to different European EQ-5D-5L value sets.

Authors:  Anders Joelson; Peter Wildeman; Freyr Gauti Sigmundsson; Ola Rolfson; Jan Karlsson
Journal:  Lancet Reg Health Eur       Date:  2021-07-14

9.  Reliability and validity of the Polish version of the Core Outcome Measures Index for the neck.

Authors:  Grzegorz Miekisiak; Mariusz Banach; Grzegorz Kiwic; Lukasz Kubaszewski; Jacek Kaczmarczyk; Adam Sulewski; Wojciech Kloc; Witold Libionka; Dariusz Latka; Marta Kollataj; Rafal Zaluski
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-12-23       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Estimation of an EORTC QLU-C10 Value Set for Spain Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Aureliano Paolo Finch; Eva Gamper; Richard Norman; Rosalie Viney; Bernhard Holzner; Madeleine King; Georg Kemmler
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 4.981

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.