Literature DB >> 30712631

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Needle Arthroscopy Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Meniscal Tears of the Knee.

Nirav Amin1, Louis McIntyre2, Thomas Carter3, John Xerogeanes4, Jeffrey Voigt5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether needle arthroscopy (NA) compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis and treatment of meniscal tears is cost-effective when evaluated over a 2-year period via patient-reported outcomes. The hypothesis is that improved diagnostic accuracy with NA would lead to less costly care and similar outcomes.
METHODS: A Markov model/decision tree analysis was performed using TreeAge Pro 2017 software. Patients were evaluated for degenerative and traumatic damage to the lateral/medial meniscus. Assumed sensitivities and specificities were derived from the medical literature. The direct costs for care were derived from the 2017 Medicare fee schedule and from private payer reimbursement rates. Costs for care included procedures performed for false-positive findings and for care for false-negative findings. Effectiveness was examined using the global knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS). Patients were evaluated over 2 years for costs and outcomes, including complications. Dominance and incremental cost-effectiveness were evaluated, and 1- to 2-way sensitivity analysis was performed to determine those variables that had the greatest effect. The consolidated economics evaluation and reporting standards checklist for reporting economic evaluations was used.
RESULTS: NA was less costly and had similar KOOS versus MRI for both the medial/lateral meniscus with private pay. Costs were less for both Medicare and private pay for medial meniscus, $780 to $1,862, and lateral meniscus, $314 to $1,256, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the reported MRI incidence of false positives with the medial meniscus and false negatives with the lateral meniscus and based on assumed standards of care, more costly care is provided when using MRI compared with NA. Outcomes were similar with NA compared with MRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, economic and decision analysis.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30712631     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.09.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthroscopy        ISSN: 0749-8063            Impact factor:   4.772


  4 in total

1.  Comparison of classic and needle arthroscopy to diagnose canine medial shoulder instability: 31 cases.

Authors:  Dirsko J F von Pfeil; Sara Megliola; Christopher Horstman; Desmond Tan; Mathieu Glassman
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 1.008

2.  Diagnostic Needle Arthroscopy and Partial Medial Meniscectomy Using Small Bore Needle Arthroscopy.

Authors:  Ryan Quinn; Sarah D Lang; Brian B Gilmer
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2020-04-25

3.  Partial Medial Meniscectomy Using Needle Arthroscopy and a Standardized Local Anesthetic Protocol.

Authors:  Matt Daggett; Tyler Tucker; Edoardo Monaco; Andrea Redler; Johnathan Pettegrew; Giorgio Bruni; Adnan Saithna
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2020-05-22

4.  Workers' Societal Costs After Knee and Shoulder Injuries and Diagnosis with In-Office Arthroscopy or Delayed MRI: A Cost-Minimization Analysis.

Authors:  Joseph Liu; Jack Farr; Omar Ramos; Jeff Voigt; Nirav Amin
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2021-06-14
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.