Literature DB >> 7615594

Evaluation of new technologies for total hip replacement. Economic modelling and clinical trials.

W J Gillespie1, B Pekarsky, D L O'Connell.   

Abstract

Cost is a factor in the choice of prosthetic components in joint replacement. For a given performance, the least expensive components are the most cost-effective. When evaluating a new prosthesis with an unknown outcome, the use of an economic model allows estimation of potential cost-effectiveness. We used published data for the survival of cemented total hip replacements from Sweden, and cost and demographic information from New South Wales, Australia, in such a model. In young active total hip recipients a new prosthetic design which offered a 90% improvement in survivorship over 15 years and a 15% reduction in the cost of revision surgery, could be sold at a price of 2 to 2.5 times that of conventional cemented components such as the Charnley Low Friction Arthroplasty and still be cost-effective. Using more likely estimates of the improved performance of new technology, however, the upper limit of cost-effectiveness is an increase of 1.5 to 1. Only a very small increase in the cost of a prosthesis could ever be justified for older patients of either sex. Most of the potential benefits of a better level of survivorship appear towards the end of the 15-year period. The results of modelling may be incorporated in clinical trial design. Given the known performance of some well-established and relatively inexpensive designs of prostheses, very large randomised studies would be required to prove an improvement in performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7615594

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  10 in total

1.  An economic model to estimate the relative costs over 20 years of different hip prostheses.

Authors:  K Baxter; G Bevan
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.710

Review 2.  Economic modelling before clinical trials.

Authors:  David J Torgerson; Sarah Byford
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-07-13

3.  Clinical trials in orthopaedics research. Part III. Overcoming operational challenges in the design and conduct of randomized clinical trials in orthopaedic surgery.

Authors:  Elena Losina; James Wright; Jeffrey N Katz
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Healthcare technology and technology assessment.

Authors:  James H Herndon; Raymond Hwang; K J Bozic; K H Bozic
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-04-11       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Assessing hospital cost of joint arthroplasty.

Authors:  Filippo Boniforti
Journal:  Joints       Date:  2016-01-31

6.  Assessing the value of a total joint replacement.

Authors:  David B Bumpass; Ryan M Nunley
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2012-12

Review 7.  OARSI Clinical Trials Recommendations: Key analytic considerations in design, analysis, and reporting of randomized controlled trials in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  E Losina; J Ranstam; J E Collins; T J Schnitzer; J N Katz
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 6.576

8.  Can choices between alternative hip prostheses be evidence based? a review of the economic evaluation literature.

Authors:  Charlotte Davies; Paula Lorgelly; Ian Shemilt; Miranda Mugford; Keith Tucker; Alex Macgregor
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2010-10-29

9.  The Columbus Knee System: 4-Year Results of a New Deep Flexion Design Compared to the NexGen Full Flex Implant.

Authors:  D Goebel; W Schultz
Journal:  Arthritis       Date:  2012-03-07

10.  Clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty in the older patient.

Authors:  F Krummenauer; C Wolf; K-P Günther; S Kirschner
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.175

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.