Jason Akindolire1, Mina W. Morcos1, Jacquelyn D. Marsh1, James L. Howard1, Brent A. Lanting1, Edward M. Vasarhelyi1. 1. From the Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Western University, London, Ont. (Akindolire, Morcos, Marsh, Howard, Lanting, Vasarhelyi); and the Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, London Health Sciences Centre, London, Ont. (Akindolire, Morcos, Howard, Lanting, Vasarhelyi).
Abstract
Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the third leading cause of total hip arthroplasty (THA) failure. Although controversial, 2-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for PJI in most situations. To date, there have been few studies describing the economic impact of PJI in today’s health care environment. The purpose of the current study was to obtain an accurate estimate of the institutional cost associated with the management of PJI in THA and to assess the economic burden of PJI compared with primary uncomplicated THA. Methods: We conducted a review of primary THA cases and 2-stage revision THA for PJI at our institution. Patients were matched for age and body mass index. All costs associated with each procedure were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the collected data. Mean costs, length of stay, clinic visits and readmission rates associated with the 2 cohorts were compared. Results: Fifty consecutive cases of revision THA were matched with 50 cases of uncomplicated primary THA between 2006 and 2014. Compared with the primary THA cohort, PJI was associated with a significant increase in mean length of hospital stay (26.5 v. 2.0 d, p < 0.001), mean number of clinic visits (9.2 v. 3.8, p < 0.001), number of readmissions (12 v. 1, p < 0.001) and average overall cost (Can$38 107 v. Can$6764, t = 8.3, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Treatment of PJI is a tremendous economic burden. Our data suggest a 5-fold increase in hospital expenditure in the management of PJI compared with primary uncomplicated THA.
Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the third leading cause of total hip arthroplasty (THA) failure. Although controversial, 2-stage revision remains the gold standard treatment for PJI in most situations. To date, there have been few studies describing the economic impact of PJI in today’s health care environment. The purpose of the current study was to obtain an accurate estimate of the institutional cost associated with the management of PJI in THA and to assess the economic burden of PJI compared with primary uncomplicated THA. Methods: We conducted a review of primary THA cases and 2-stage revision THA for PJI at our institution. Patients were matched for age and body mass index. All costs associated with each procedure were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the collected data. Mean costs, length of stay, clinic visits and readmission rates associated with the 2 cohorts were compared. Results: Fifty consecutive cases of revision THA were matched with 50 cases of uncomplicated primary THA between 2006 and 2014. Compared with the primary THA cohort, PJI was associated with a significant increase in mean length of hospital stay (26.5 v. 2.0 d, p < 0.001), mean number of clinic visits (9.2 v. 3.8, p < 0.001), number of readmissions (12 v. 1, p < 0.001) and average overall cost (Can$38 107 v. Can$6764, t = 8.3, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Treatment of PJI is a tremendous economic burden. Our data suggest a 5-fold increase in hospital expenditure in the management of PJI compared with primary uncomplicated THA.
Authors: Atul F Kamath; Kevin L Ong; Edmund Lau; Vanessa Chan; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry; Kevin J Bozic Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Valérie Zeller; Luc Lhotellier; Simon Marmor; Philippe Leclerc; Alysa Krain; Wilfrid Graff; Françoise Ducroquet; David Biau; Philippe Leonard; Nicole Desplaces; Patrick Mamoudy Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-01-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: James I Huddleston; Yun Wang; Carlos Uquillas; James H Herndon; William J Maloney Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Daniel J Hackett; Adam C Rothenberg; Antonia F Chen; Christina Gutowski; David Jaekel; Ivan M Tomek; Brian S Parsley; Paul Ducheyne; Paul A Manner Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: Kevin J Bozic; Atul F Kamath; Kevin Ong; Edmund Lau; Steve Kurtz; Vanessa Chan; Thomas P Vail; Harry Rubash; Daniel J Berry Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-12-03 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Kevin J Bozic; Patricia Katz; Miriam Cisternas; Linda Ono; Michael D Ries; Jonathan Showstack Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Bhaveen H Kapadia; Samik Banerjee; Jeffrey J Cherian; Kevin J Bozic; Michael A Mont Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Andrew D Beswick; Karen T Elvers; Alison J Smith; Rachael Gooberman-Hill; Andrew Lovering; Ashley W Blom Journal: BMC Med Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Mustafa Akkaya; Georges Vles; Iman Godarzi Bakhtiari; Amir Sandiford; Jochen Salber; Thorsten Gehrke; Mustafa Citak Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Hong Seok Kim; Jung Wee Park; Sun Young Moon; Young Kyun Lee; Yong Chan Ha; Kyung Hoi Koo Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2020-12-21 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Mina W Morcos; Paul Kooner; Jackie Marsh; James Howard; Brent Lanting; Edward Vasarhelyi Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2021-03-05 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Cody R Fisher; Harold I Salmons; Jay Mandrekar; Kerryl E Greenwood-Quaintance; Matthew P Abdel; Robin Patel Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-09-27 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Peter Wildeman; Ola Rolfson; Bo Söderquist; Per Wretenberg; Viktor Lindgren Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 4.755