Generic orthopaedic trauma implants: implementation, outcomes, and cost savings

IF 0.2 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Rebekah Kleinsmith, Stephen A. Doxey, Fernando A. Huyke-Hernández, Nizar Mikhael, Brian P. Cunningham
{"title":"Generic orthopaedic trauma implants: implementation, outcomes, and cost savings","authors":"Rebekah Kleinsmith, Stephen A. Doxey, Fernando A. Huyke-Hernández, Nizar Mikhael, Brian P. Cunningham","doi":"10.1097/BCO.0000000000001237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: As healthcare costs continue to rise, there has been increasing emphasis placed on providing value-based care. In orthopaedics, one way to influence cost is through the use of generic implants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate cost-savings and surgical outcomes with the implementation of generic orthopaedic trauma implant use. Methods: This was a retrospective case series of 154 primary orthopaedic trauma patients from April – December 2022 within a level II trauma center. Patients were included if treated solely with generic implants. Exclusion criteria consisted of revision procedures for any reason, and the use of conventional name brand implants. Eleven different primary orthopaedic trauma procedures in which generic implants were evaluated. Main outcome measurements included operative time, perioperative complications, reoperation rates, patient mortality, implant cost, cost-savings. Results: Cost-savings per procedure with the use of generic implants in eleven different primary orthopaedic trauma procedures ranged from 16% to 73%. The average cost-savings was 48.8% among the 11 procedures evaluated, with a yearly cost-savings of 56.0% when case volume is considered. Maintaining the 2021 case volume for one surgeon constant, an overall savings of $256,794 could be generated. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that generic implants can provide an opportunity for relatively good patient outcomes with minimal overall risk. Generic implants are a valid alternative to decrease costs while maintaining acceptable patient outcomes. Future studies should seek to provide patient-reported outcome measures for generic implants and compare them to conventional implant use.","PeriodicalId":10732,"journal":{"name":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","volume":"17 1","pages":"38 - 42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Orthopaedic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BCO.0000000000001237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As healthcare costs continue to rise, there has been increasing emphasis placed on providing value-based care. In orthopaedics, one way to influence cost is through the use of generic implants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate cost-savings and surgical outcomes with the implementation of generic orthopaedic trauma implant use. Methods: This was a retrospective case series of 154 primary orthopaedic trauma patients from April – December 2022 within a level II trauma center. Patients were included if treated solely with generic implants. Exclusion criteria consisted of revision procedures for any reason, and the use of conventional name brand implants. Eleven different primary orthopaedic trauma procedures in which generic implants were evaluated. Main outcome measurements included operative time, perioperative complications, reoperation rates, patient mortality, implant cost, cost-savings. Results: Cost-savings per procedure with the use of generic implants in eleven different primary orthopaedic trauma procedures ranged from 16% to 73%. The average cost-savings was 48.8% among the 11 procedures evaluated, with a yearly cost-savings of 56.0% when case volume is considered. Maintaining the 2021 case volume for one surgeon constant, an overall savings of $256,794 could be generated. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that generic implants can provide an opportunity for relatively good patient outcomes with minimal overall risk. Generic implants are a valid alternative to decrease costs while maintaining acceptable patient outcomes. Future studies should seek to provide patient-reported outcome measures for generic implants and compare them to conventional implant use.
通用创伤骨科植入物:实施、结果和成本节约
背景:随着医疗成本的持续上升,人们越来越重视提供以价值为基础的医疗服务。在骨科领域,影响成本的一种方法是使用通用植入物。本研究旨在评估使用通用创伤骨科植入物所节省的成本和手术效果。方法:这是一项回顾性病例系列研究,研究对象为二级创伤中心的 154 名初级创伤骨科患者,时间为 2022 年 4 月至 12 月。如果患者仅使用通用植入物进行治疗,则将其纳入研究范围。排除标准包括因任何原因进行翻修手术和使用传统名牌植入物。对使用非专利植入物的 11 种不同的主要骨科创伤手术进行了评估。主要结果指标包括手术时间、围手术期并发症、再手术率、患者死亡率、植入成本和成本节约。结果:在 11 种不同的初级创伤骨科手术中,使用通用植入物的每项手术成本节约率从 16% 到 73% 不等。在评估的 11 项手术中,平均成本节约率为 48.8%,如果考虑到病例量,则每年成本节约率为 56.0%。保持一名外科医生 2021 年的病例量不变,总共可节省 256,794 美元。结论:这项研究表明,非专利种植体可以为患者提供相对较好的治疗效果,同时将总体风险降到最低。非专利植入物是一种有效的替代方法,既能降低成本,又能保持可接受的患者疗效。未来的研究应提供患者报告的非专利种植体疗效指标,并将其与传统种植体进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Current Orthopaedic Practice is a peer-reviewed, general orthopaedic journal that translates clinical research into best practices for diagnosing, treating, and managing musculoskeletal disorders. The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical research, invited special focus reviews and general reviews, as well as original articles on innovations in practice, case reports, point/counterpoint, and diagnostic imaging.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信