Angela T Chen1, Corin I Bronsther1, Elizabeth E Stanley1, A David Paltiel2, James K Sullivan1, Jamie E Collins3, Tuhina Neogi4, Jeffrey N Katz5, Elena Losina6. 1. The Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe) and Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts (A.T.C., C.I.B., E.E.S., J.K.S.). 2. Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut (A.D.P.). 3. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe) and Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (J.E.C.). 4. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts (T.N.). 5. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe) and Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts (J.N.K.). 6. Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research (OrACORe) and Policy and Innovation eValuation in Orthopaedic Treatments (PIVOT) Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, and Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts (E.L.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Total knee replacement (TKR) is an effective and cost-effective strategy for treating end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Greater risk for complications among TKR recipients with a body mass index (BMI) of 40 kg/m2 or greater has raised concerns about the value of TKR in this population. OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of TKR in recipients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater using a cost-effectiveness analysis. DESIGN: Osteoarthritis Policy Model to assess long-term clinical benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of TKR in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater. DATA SOURCES: Total knee replacement parameters from longitudinal studies and published literature, and costs from Medicare Physician Fee Schedules, the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, and published data. TARGET POPULATION: Recipients of TKR with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater in the United States. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Total knee replacement. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), discounted at 3% annually. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Total knee replacement increased QALYs by 0.71 year and lifetime medical costs by $25 200 among patients aged 50 to 65 years with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater, resulting in an ICER of $35 200. Total knee replacement in patients older than 65 years with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater increased QALYs by 0.39 year and costs by $21 100, resulting in an ICER of $54 100. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: In TKR recipients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater and diabetes and cardiovascular disease, ICERs were below $75 000 per QALY. Results were most sensitive to complication rates and preoperative pain levels. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, at a $55 000-per-QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, TKR had a 100% and 90% likelihood of being a cost-effective strategy for patients aged 50 to 65 years and patients older than 65 years, respectively. LIMITATION: Data are derived from several sources. CONCLUSION: From a cost-effectiveness perspective, TKR offers good value in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater, including those with multiple comorbidities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.
BACKGROUND: Total knee replacement (TKR) is an effective and cost-effective strategy for treating end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Greater risk for complications among TKR recipients with a body mass index (BMI) of 40 kg/m2 or greater has raised concerns about the value of TKR in this population. OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of TKR in recipients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater using a cost-effectiveness analysis. DESIGN:Osteoarthritis Policy Model to assess long-term clinical benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of TKR in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater. DATA SOURCES: Total knee replacement parameters from longitudinal studies and published literature, and costs from Medicare Physician Fee Schedules, the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, and published data. TARGET POPULATION: Recipients of TKR with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater in the United States. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Total knee replacement. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), discounted at 3% annually. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Total knee replacement increased QALYs by 0.71 year and lifetime medical costs by $25 200 among patients aged 50 to 65 years with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater, resulting in an ICER of $35 200. Total knee replacement in patients older than 65 years with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater increased QALYs by 0.39 year and costs by $21 100, resulting in an ICER of $54 100. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: In TKR recipients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater and diabetes and cardiovascular disease, ICERs were below $75 000 per QALY. Results were most sensitive to complication rates and preoperative pain levels. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, at a $55 000-per-QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, TKR had a 100% and 90% likelihood of being a cost-effective strategy for patients aged 50 to 65 years and patients older than 65 years, respectively. LIMITATION: Data are derived from several sources. CONCLUSION: From a cost-effectiveness perspective, TKR offers good value in patients with a BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater, including those with multiple comorbidities. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health.
Authors: Wenjun Li; David C Ayers; Courtland G Lewis; Thomas R Bowen; Jeroan J Allison; Patricia D Franklin Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Ian McCarthy; Michael O'Brien; Christopher Ames; Chessie Robinson; Thomas Errico; David W Polly; Richard Hostin Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Savannah R Smith; Jeffrey N Katz; Jamie E Collins; Daniel H Solomon; Joanne M Jordan; Lisa G Suter; Edward H Yelin; A David Paltiel; Elena Losina Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2016-12-31 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Amish J Dave; Faith Selzer; Elena Losina; Kristina M Klara; Jamie E Collins; Ilana Usiskin; Philip Band; David F Dalury; Richard Iorio; Kirk Kindsfater; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: John B Meding; Kyle Reddleman; Michael E Keating; Angela Klay; Merrill A Ritter; Philip M Faris; Michael E Berend Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Barbara Bordini; Susanna Stea; Sara Cremonini; Marco Viceconti; Rossana De Palma; Aldo Toni Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2009-03-05 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Shilpa Bhupathiraju; David Wormser; Pei Gao; Stephen Kaptoge; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Benjamin Cairns; Rachel Huxley; Chandra Jackson; Grace Joshy; Sarah Lewington; JoAnn Manson; Neil Murphy; Alpa Patel; Jonathan Samet; Mark Woodward; Wei Zheng; Maigen Zhou; Narinder Bansal; Aurelio Barricarte; Brian Carter; James Cerhan; George Smith; Xianghua Fang; Oscar Franco; Jane Green; Jim Halsey; Janet Hildebrand; Keum Jung; Rosemary Korda; Dale McLerran; Steven Moore; Linda O'Keeffe; Ellie Paige; Anna Ramond; Gillian Reeves; Betsy Rolland; Carlotta Sacerdote; Naveed Sattar; Eleni Sofianopoulou; June Stevens; Michael Thun; Hirotsugu Ueshima; Ling Yang; Young Yun; Peter Willeit; Emily Banks; Valerie Beral; Zhengming Chen; Susan Gapstur; Marc Gunter; Patricia Hartge; Sun Jee; Tai-Hing Lam; Richard Peto; John Potter; Walter Willett; Simon Thompson; John Danesh; Frank Hu Journal: Lancet Date: 2016-07-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Emma E Williams; Jeffrey N Katz; Valia P Leifer; Jamie E Collins; Tuhina Neogi; Lisa G Suter; Bruce Levy; Alexander Farid; Clare E Safran-Norton; A David Paltiel; Elena Losina Journal: ACR Open Rheumatol Date: 2022-07-21