Value in Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparative Patient-Level Value Analysis of Cost and Cost-Effectiveness for Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty and Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States.

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Nicholas Sauder, Michael Booth, Perry L Lim, Christopher M Melnic, Hany S Bedair
{"title":"Value in Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparative Patient-Level Value Analysis of Cost and Cost-Effectiveness for Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty and Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States.","authors":"Nicholas Sauder, Michael Booth, Perry L Lim, Christopher M Melnic, Hany S Bedair","doi":"10.5435/JAAOS-D-25-00299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Value-based health care emphasizes streamlining costs and improving outcomes. We used time-driven activity-based costing and patient-reported outcome measures to perform a patient-level value analysis. We compared the cost and cost-effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We sourced cases from a prospectively maintained, multi-institutional arthroplasty registry. A total of 422 UKAs were matched 1:3 to 1,266 primary TKAs, on baseline characteristics. Revision, conversion, and robotic cases were excluded. Time-driven activity-based costing was used to calculate total procedure facility costs. Costs were converted from United States dollars to cost units (CUs) by dividing all costs by an undisclosed constant. Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short-Form (KOOS-PS) scores were collected preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Value KOOS-PS was calculated for each patient. Value KOOS-PS was defined as the quotient of 1-year improvement in KOOS-PS and total procedure facility cost. Value KOOS-PS was converted to a scale with a maximum of 100.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>UKA had higher mean Value KOOS-PS than primary TKA (UKA: 18.3 vs. primary TKA: 15.8; P = 0.009). KOOS-PS scores were not the primary driver of differences in value, as the procedures did not differ significantly in 1-year change in KOOS-PS (UKA: +16.5 vs. primary TKA: +16.1; P = 0.641). Instead, substantial differences in costs drove the observed differences in value. Primary TKA facility costs were 20.3% more expensive than UKA (811 CUs vs. 674 CUs; P < 0.001). When only outpatient procedures were considered, outpatient primary TKA facility cost was 8.3% more expensive than outpatient UKA (720 CUs vs. 665 CUs; P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>UKA offers higher value that primary TKA, driven primarily by lower cost structure rather than differences in patient-reported outcomes. To maximize health care value, patients with single compartment disease should be treated with UKA, as they will have similar outcomes with reduced cost, as compared with primary TKA. Outpatient surgery can considerably-but not entirely-reduce the facility cost discrepancy between primary TKA and UKA.</p>","PeriodicalId":51098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","volume":" ","pages":"e1269-e1278"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-25-00299","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Value-based health care emphasizes streamlining costs and improving outcomes. We used time-driven activity-based costing and patient-reported outcome measures to perform a patient-level value analysis. We compared the cost and cost-effectiveness of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods: We sourced cases from a prospectively maintained, multi-institutional arthroplasty registry. A total of 422 UKAs were matched 1:3 to 1,266 primary TKAs, on baseline characteristics. Revision, conversion, and robotic cases were excluded. Time-driven activity-based costing was used to calculate total procedure facility costs. Costs were converted from United States dollars to cost units (CUs) by dividing all costs by an undisclosed constant. Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short-Form (KOOS-PS) scores were collected preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. Value KOOS-PS was calculated for each patient. Value KOOS-PS was defined as the quotient of 1-year improvement in KOOS-PS and total procedure facility cost. Value KOOS-PS was converted to a scale with a maximum of 100.

Results: UKA had higher mean Value KOOS-PS than primary TKA (UKA: 18.3 vs. primary TKA: 15.8; P = 0.009). KOOS-PS scores were not the primary driver of differences in value, as the procedures did not differ significantly in 1-year change in KOOS-PS (UKA: +16.5 vs. primary TKA: +16.1; P = 0.641). Instead, substantial differences in costs drove the observed differences in value. Primary TKA facility costs were 20.3% more expensive than UKA (811 CUs vs. 674 CUs; P < 0.001). When only outpatient procedures were considered, outpatient primary TKA facility cost was 8.3% more expensive than outpatient UKA (720 CUs vs. 665 CUs; P < 0.001).

Conclusion: UKA offers higher value that primary TKA, driven primarily by lower cost structure rather than differences in patient-reported outcomes. To maximize health care value, patients with single compartment disease should be treated with UKA, as they will have similar outcomes with reduced cost, as compared with primary TKA. Outpatient surgery can considerably-but not entirely-reduce the facility cost discrepancy between primary TKA and UKA.

膝关节置换术的价值:美国单室膝关节置换术和初次全膝关节置换术的成本和成本-效果比较患者水平的价值分析。
背景:基于价值的卫生保健强调简化成本和改善结果。我们使用时间驱动的基于活动的成本计算和患者报告的结果测量来执行患者水平的价值分析。我们比较了单室膝关节置换术(UKA)和初次全膝关节置换术(TKA)的成本和成本效益。方法:我们从前瞻性维护的多机构关节置换术登记处获取病例。根据基线特征,共有422个uka与1,266个主要tka进行了1:3匹配。排除翻修、转换和机器人病例。采用时间驱动的作业成本法计算程序设备总成本。通过将所有成本除以一个未披露的常数,成本从美元转换为成本单位。膝关节骨性关节炎结局评分:术前和术后1年收集身体功能简表(KOOS-PS)评分。计算每位患者的KOOS-PS值。KOOS-PS值定义为1年KOOS-PS改善与程序设施总成本之商。值KOOS-PS转换为最大100的刻度。结果:UKA的KOOS-PS平均值高于原发TKA (UKA: 18.3 vs原发TKA: 15.8;P = 0.009)。KOOS-PS评分不是价值差异的主要驱动因素,因为两种治疗方法在KOOS-PS的1年变化中没有显著差异(UKA: +16.5 vs.原发性TKA: +16.1;P = 0.641)。相反,成本的巨大差异导致了观察到的价值差异。初级TKA设施成本比UKA高20.3% (811 cu vs 674 cu);P < 0.001)。当只考虑门诊程序时,门诊初级TKA设施费用比门诊UKA高8.3% (720 cu vs 665 cu;P < 0.001)。结论:UKA比原发性TKA具有更高的价值,主要是由于较低的成本结构,而不是患者报告结果的差异。为了最大限度地提高医疗保健价值,单室疾病患者应该接受UKA治疗,因为与原发性TKA相比,他们将获得相似的结果,且成本更低。门诊手术可以在很大程度上(但不是完全)减少原发性TKA和UKA之间的设施成本差异。
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
6.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
529
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons was established in the fall of 1993 by the Academy in response to its membership’s demand for a clinical review journal. Two issues were published the first year, followed by six issues yearly from 1994 through 2004. In September 2005, JAAOS began publishing monthly issues. Each issue includes richly illustrated peer-reviewed articles focused on clinical diagnosis and management. Special features in each issue provide commentary on developments in pharmacotherapeutics, materials and techniques, and computer applications.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信