Literature DB >> 27909127

Costs, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic and open repair for rotator cuff tears: an economic evaluation alongside the UKUFF trial.

J Murphy1, A Gray1, C Cooper2, D Cooper3, C Ramsay3, A Carr2.   

Abstract

AIMS: A trial-based comparison of the use of resources, costs and quality of life outcomes of arthroscopic and open surgical management for rotator cuff tears in the United Kingdom NHS was performed using data from the United Kingdom Rotator Cuff Study (UKUFF) randomised controlled trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using data from 273 patients, healthcare-related use of resources, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated at 12 months and 24 months after surgery on an intention-to-treat basis with adjustment for covariates. Uncertainty about the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for arthroscopic versus open management at 24 months of follow-up was incorporated using bootstrapping. Multiple imputation methods were used to deal with missing data.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the arthroscopic and open groups in terms of total mean use and cost of resources or QALYs at any time post-operatively. Open management dominated arthroscopic management in 59.8% of bootstrapped cost and effect differences. The probability that arthroscopic management was cost-effective compared with open management at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained was 20.9%.
CONCLUSION: There was no significant overall difference in the use or cost of resources or quality of life between arthroscopic and open management in the trial. There was uncertainty about which strategy was most cost-effective. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1648-55. ©2016 Gray et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cost-effectiveness analysis; Cost-utility analysis; Economic evaluation; Rotator cuff tear

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27909127     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B12.BJJ-2016-0121.R1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  5 in total

1.  Trends Associated with Open Versus Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair.

Authors:  Molly A Day; Robert W Westermann; Nicholas A Bedard; Natalie A Glass; Brian R Wolf
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2018-08-27

2.  Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Oxford, Constant, and UCLA shoulder score for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Sheng Xu; Jerry Yongqiang Chen; Hannah Mei En Lie; Ying Hao; Denny Tjiauw Tjoen Lie
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-11-27

3.  The Relevance of Open Rotator Cuff Repair in 2021.

Authors:  Khalid D Mohammed; Richard F W Lloyd; Chethan Nagaraj; Jegan Krishnan
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 1.251

4.  Evaluation of the Trends, Concomitant Procedures, and Complications With Open and Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repairs in the Medicare Population.

Authors:  Andrew R Jensen; Peter S Cha; Sai K Devana; Chad Ishmael; Theo Di Pauli von Treuheim; Anthony D'Oro; Jeffrey C Wang; David R McAllister; Frank A Petrigliano
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-10-12

5.  Cost-Utility Analysis of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Health Economic Study Using Real-World Data.

Authors:  Cécile Grobet; Laurent Audigé; Klaus Eichler; Flurina Meier; Beatrice Brunner; Simon Wieser; Matthias Flury
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2020-04-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.