Nadia Sutton1, Niels-Derrek Schmitz2, Stephen S Johnston3. 1. Associate Director, Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson, Franchise Health Economics and Market Access, Somerville, NJ, US. 2. Franchise Medical Director, Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson, Research & Development Medical Affairs, Norderstedt, Germany. 3. Director, Real World Data Analytics and Research, Johnson & Johnson, Epidemiology, Medical Devices, New Brunswick, NJ, US.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare economic and clinical outcomes between skin staples and 2-octyl cyanoacrylate plus polymer mesh tape, Dermabond Prineo skin closure system, (SCS) among patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). METHOD: Retrospective, observational study using the Premier Healthcare Database, which comprises hospital administrative and billing data for over 700 hospitals in the US. Patients selected for study had an elective hospital admission, with discharge occurring between January 2012 and September 2015, carrying primary ICD-9-CM procedure and diagnosis codes for TKR and osteoarthritis. Patients were classified into two mutually-exclusive groups based on billing records during the index admission: those with billing record(s) for the skin closure system (SCS group); and those with billing record(s) for skin staples (staple group). Primary outcomes were index admission's length of stay (LOS), total hospital costs, and discharge status (skilled nursing facility (SNF)/other versus home/home health-care); exploratory outcomes included operating room time (ORT) during index admission and 30, 60, and 90-day readmissions. The SCS and staple groups were propensity score matched (1:1/nearest neighbour/caliper=0.10) on patient, hospital, and provider characteristics. Multivariable regressions accounting for hospital-level clustering after matching were used to compare outcomes between study groups. RESULTS: Each group comprised 971 patients (1942 total patients; mean age: 65.3 years; female: 63.5%). The groups were generally well-balanced on matching covariates: mean standardised difference calculated across 49 covariates=0.049. Compared with the staple group, the SCS group had statistically significant shorter LOS (2.8 days versus 3.2 days, p=0.002), lower rate of discharge to SNF/other versus home/home health-care (26.4% versus 38.5%, p=0.011), and lower rate of 30, 60, and 90-day readmissions (30-day, 1.8% versus 4.4%, p=0.006; 60-day, 3.0% versus 5.4%, p<0.001; 90-day, 5.4% versus 7.4%, p=0.016). Differences between the groups for other outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing TKR, use of the SCS was associated with shorter LOS, less resource intensive discharge status, and lower rates of all-cause readmission as compared with skin staples.
OBJECTIVE: To compare economic and clinical outcomes between skin staples and 2-octyl cyanoacrylate plus polymer mesh tape, Dermabond Prineo skin closure system, (SCS) among patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR). METHOD: Retrospective, observational study using the Premier Healthcare Database, which comprises hospital administrative and billing data for over 700 hospitals in the US. Patients selected for study had an elective hospital admission, with discharge occurring between January 2012 and September 2015, carrying primary ICD-9-CM procedure and diagnosis codes for TKR and osteoarthritis. Patients were classified into two mutually-exclusive groups based on billing records during the index admission: those with billing record(s) for the skin closure system (SCS group); and those with billing record(s) for skin staples (staple group). Primary outcomes were index admission's length of stay (LOS), total hospital costs, and discharge status (skilled nursing facility (SNF)/other versus home/home health-care); exploratory outcomes included operating room time (ORT) during index admission and 30, 60, and 90-day readmissions. The SCS and staple groups were propensity score matched (1:1/nearest neighbour/caliper=0.10) on patient, hospital, and provider characteristics. Multivariable regressions accounting for hospital-level clustering after matching were used to compare outcomes between study groups. RESULTS: Each group comprised 971 patients (1942 total patients; mean age: 65.3 years; female: 63.5%). The groups were generally well-balanced on matching covariates: mean standardised difference calculated across 49 covariates=0.049. Compared with the staple group, the SCS group had statistically significant shorter LOS (2.8 days versus 3.2 days, p=0.002), lower rate of discharge to SNF/other versus home/home health-care (26.4% versus 38.5%, p=0.011), and lower rate of 30, 60, and 90-day readmissions (30-day, 1.8% versus 4.4%, p=0.006; 60-day, 3.0% versus 5.4%, p<0.001; 90-day, 5.4% versus 7.4%, p=0.016). Differences between the groups for other outcomes were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing TKR, use of the SCS was associated with shorter LOS, less resource intensive discharge status, and lower rates of all-cause readmission as compared with skin staples.
Authors: Kavin Sundaram; Nicolas S Piuzzi; Brendan M Patterson; Kim L Stearns; Viktor E Krebs; Michael A Mont Journal: Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Date: 2019-11-05