Literature DB >> 25758376

Future patient demand for shoulder arthroplasty by younger patients: national projections.

Eric M Padegimas1, Mitchell Maltenfort, Mark D Lazarus, Matthew L Ramsey, Gerald R Williams, Surena Namdari.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of shoulder arthroplasties in younger patients (55 years or younger) are not as reliable compared with those of the general population. Greater risk of revision and higher complication rates in younger patients present direct costs to the healthcare system and indirect costs to the patient in terms of quality of life. Previous studies have suggested an increased demand for shoulder arthroplasties overall, but to our knowledge, the demand in younger patients has not been explored. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked: (1) What was the demand for shoulder arthroplasties between 2002 and 2011 in the United States for all patients and a specific subpopulation of patients who were 55 years old or younger? (2) How is the demand for shoulder arthroplasties in younger patients projected to change through 2030? (3) How is procedural demand projected to change in younger patients through 2030, and specifically, what can we anticipate in terms of hemiarthroplasty volume compared with that of total shoulder arthroplasty?
METHODS: We used the National Inpatient Sample database to identify primary shoulder arthroplasties performed between 2002 and 2011. A Poisson regression model was developed using the National Inpatient Sample data and United States Census Bureau projections on future population changes to predict estimated national demand for total shoulder arthroplasties and hemiarthroplasties in all patients and in the subpopulation 55 years old or younger. This model was projected until 2030, with associated 95% CIs. We then specifically analyzed the projected demand of hemiarthroplasties and compared this with demand for all arthroplasty procedures in the younger patient population.
RESULTS: Demand for shoulder arthroplasties in patients 55 years or younger is increasing at a rate of 8.2% per year (95% CI, 7.06%-9.35%), compared with a growth rate of 12.1% (95% CI, 8.35%-16.02%) per year for patients older than 55 years. In 2002, 15.9% (3587 of 22,617 captured in the National Inpatient Sample) of primary shoulder arthroplasties were performed in patients 55 years old or younger. In 2011, the relative size of the younger patient population had decreased to 11.0% (7001 of 63,784) of all recipients of shoulder arthroplasties. The demand for primary shoulder arthroplasties among younger patients is projected to increase by 333.3% (95% CI, 257.0%-432.5%) from 2011 to 2030. However, in patients older than 55 years demand is projected to increase by 755.4% (95% CI, 380.7%-1511.1%). Therefore, despite the increased predicted demand for shoulder arthroplasties in younger patients, they are predicted to account for only 4% of all recipients by 2030. The rate of hemiarthroplasties in patients 55 years or younger showed a 16.5% decline per year (95% CI, 16.1%-17.1%) from 2002 (53.6% of all arthroplasties) to 2011 (34.2% of all arthroplasties). By 2030, hemiarthroplasties are projected to account for only 23.5% of all shoulder arthroplasties in patients 55 years or younger.
CONCLUSIONS: The demand for shoulder arthroplasties in younger patients continues to increase in the United States; however, rates of hemiarthroplasties are declining. The demand has substantial implications for future revision arthroplasties, which include the direct healthcare costs of revision arthroplasty, the indirect societal burden of missed productivity owing to time away from work, and the increased burden of the need for qualified surgeons to meet the demand. Despite the increasing rate of arthroplasties performed in younger patients, current and projected demands remain greater for older patients, indicating a disproportionately greater need for shoulder arthroplasties in older patients. This is in contrast to the trends observed in the literature regarding hip and knee arthroplasties that show projected demands to be greater in younger patients. Factors responsible for the difference in demand require further investigation but may be related to changing indications, reported poorer outcomes in younger patients, the increased popularity of reverse shoulder arthroplasties in the elderly, or the evolution of nonarthroplasty options. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25758376      PMCID: PMC4418978          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-015-4231-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  37 in total

1.  Total knee arthroplasty in a group of patients less than 45 years of age.

Authors:  D F Dalury; F C Ewald; M J Christie; R D Scott
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty in Olmsted County, Minnesota: a population-based study.

Authors:  Julie E Adams; John W Sperling; Cathy D Schleck; W Scott Harmsen; Robert H Cofield
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Grammont reversed prosthesis for acute complex fracture of the proximal humerus in an elderly population with 5 to 12 years follow-up.

Authors:  J-F Cazeneuve; D-J Cristofari
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2014-01-20       Impact factor: 2.256

4.  Arthroscopic trans-capsular axillary nerve decompression: indication and surgical technique.

Authors:  Peter J Millett; Trevor R Gaskill
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2011-08-09       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Clinical and radiographic results of cementless AML total hip arthroplasty in young patients.

Authors:  O A Nercessian; W H Wu; H Sarkissian
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 6.  What is the role of arthroscopic debridement for glenohumeral arthritis? A critical examination of the literature.

Authors:  Surena Namdari; Nathan Skelley; Jay D Keener; Leesa M Galatz; Ken Yamaguchi
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 4.772

7.  Comparison of hemiarthroplasty and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients.

Authors:  Derek J Cuff; Derek R Pupello
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Shoulder hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming in patients 55 years old or less.

Authors:  Matthew D Saltzman; Aaron M Chamberlain; Deana M Mercer; Winston J Warme; Alexander L Bertelsen; Frederick A Matsen
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 3.019

9.  Arthroscopic debridement and capsular release for the treatment of shoulder osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Nathan W Skelley; Surena Namdari; Aaron M Chamberlain; Jay D Keener; Leesa M Galatz; Ken Yamaguchi
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.772

10.  Total shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis of the shoulder: results of 303 consecutive cases.

Authors:  John W Sperling; Robert H Cofield; Cathy D Schleck; W Scott Harmsen
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2007-10-29       Impact factor: 3.019

View more
  56 in total

1.  Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty in young patients with osteoarthritis: all-polyethylene versus metal-backed glenoid.

Authors:  M O Gauci; N Bonnevialle; G Moineau; M Baba; G Walch; P Boileau
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 5.082

Review 2.  Review article: Patient characteristics that act as risk factors for intraoperative complications in hip, knee, and shoulder arthroplasties.

Authors:  Adel Hijazi; Muhammad Talha Padela; Zain Sayeed; Aws Hammad; Kamela Devole; Todd Frush; Gamal Mostafa; Walid K Yassir; Khaled J Saleh
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-06-17

3.  What is the Rate of Revision Discectomies After Primary Discectomy on a National Scale?

Authors:  Sohrab S Virk; Ashish Diwan; Frank M Phillips; Harvinder Sandhu; Safdar N Khan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-08-28       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Comorbidity effects on shoulder arthroplasty costs analysis of a nationwide private payer insurance data set.

Authors:  Samuel Rosas; Karim G Sabeh; Leonard T Buller; Tsun Yee Law; Steven P Kalandiak; Jonathan C Levy
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2017-01-27       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Comparison of general versus isolated regional anesthesia in total shoulder arthroplasty: A retrospective propensity-matched cohort analysis.

Authors:  David Y Ding; Siddharth A Mahure; Brent Mollon; Steven D Shamah; Joseph D Zuckerman; Young W Kwon
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2017-07-21

6.  Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Is Less Time in the Hospital Better?

Authors:  Kyle R Duchman; Chris A Anthony; Robert W Westermann; Andrew J Pugely; Yubo Gao; Carolyn M Hettrich
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2017

7.  What Factors are Predictive of Patient-reported Outcomes? A Prospective Study of 337 Shoulder Arthroplasties.

Authors:  Frederick A Matsen; Stacy M Russ; Phuong T Vu; Jason E Hsu; Robert M Lucas; Bryan A Comstock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Economic Decision Model Suggests Total Shoulder Arthroplasty is Superior to Hemiarthroplasty in Young Patients with End-stage Shoulder Arthritis.

Authors:  Suneel B Bhat; Mark Lazarus; Charles Getz; Gerald R Williams; Surena Namdari
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Are at Higher Risk for Pneumonia, Septic Shock, and Blood Transfusions After Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ryan Lee; Danny Lee; Ishwarya S Mamidi; William V Probasco; Jessica H Heyer; Rajeev Pandarinath
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 10.  The Perioperative Impact of Surgical Case Order in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Authors:  John G Horneff; Usman Ali Syed; Adam Seidl; Jessica Britton; Gerald Williams; Joseph Abboud
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2019-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.