Economic evaluation of access to musculoskeletal care: the case of waiting for total knee arthroplasty.

Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100968565 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1471-2474 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14712474 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2000-

Health Care Costs* ; Waiting Lists*; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/*economics ; Health Care Rationing/*economics ; Health Services Accessibility/*economics ; Health Services Needs and Demand/*economics ; Osteoarthritis, Knee/*economics ; Osteoarthritis, Knee/*surgery; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/adverse effects ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee/mortality ; Cost Savings ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Decision Support Techniques ; Health Services Research ; Humans ; Insurance, Health, Reimbursement/economics ; Markov Chains ; Medicare/economics ; Middle Aged ; Models, Economic ; Osteoarthritis, Knee/mortality ; Patient Selection ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome ; United States

Background: The projected demand for total knee arthroplasty is staggering. At its root, the solution involves increasing supply or decreasing demand. Other developed nations have used rationing and wait times to distribute this service. However, economic impact and cost-effectiveness of waiting for TKA is unknown.
Methods: A Markov decision model was constructed for a cost-utility analysis of three treatment strategies for end-stage knee osteoarthritis: 1) TKA without delay, 2) a waiting period with no non-operative treatment and 3) a non-operative treatment bridge during that waiting period in a cohort of 60 year-old patients. Outcome probabilities and effectiveness were derived from the literature. Costs were estimated from the societal perspective with national average Medicare reimbursement. Effectiveness was expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Principal outcome measures were average incremental costs, effectiveness, and quality-adjusted life years; and net health benefits.
Results: In the base case, a 2-year wait-time both with and without a non-operative treatment bridge resulted in a lower number of average QALYs gained (11.57 (no bridge) and 11.95 (bridge) vs. 12.14 (no delay). The average cost was $1,660 higher for TKA without delay than wait-time with no bridge, but $1,810 less than wait-time with non-operative bridge. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing wait-time with no bridge to TKA without delay was $2,901/QALY. When comparing TKA without delay to waiting with non-operative bridge, TKA without delay produced greater utility at a lower cost to society.
Conclusions: TKA without delay is the preferred cost-effective treatment strategy when compared to a waiting for TKA without non-operative bridge. TKA without delay is cost saving when a non-operative bridge is used during the waiting period. As it is unlikely that patients waiting for TKA would not receive non-operative treatment, TKA without delay may be an overall cost-saving health care delivery strategy. Policies aimed at increasing the supply of TKA should be considered as savings exist that could indirectly fund those strategies.

Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2004 Nov 10;53(6):1-38. (PMID: 15580947)
Med Care. 1998 Jun;36(6):778-92. (PMID: 9630120)
JAMA. 1996 Oct 9;276(14):1172-7. (PMID: 8827972)
Health Care Manag Sci. 2007 Jun;10(2):195-215. (PMID: 17608059)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Jul;90(7):1447-56. (PMID: 18594092)
Acta Orthop. 2010 Feb;81(1):119-21. (PMID: 20170434)
J Arthroplasty. 2010 Feb;25(2):213-5. (PMID: 20022459)
JAMA. 1996 Oct 16;276(15):1253-8. (PMID: 8849754)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780-5. (PMID: 17403800)
Med Decis Making. 1997 Apr-Jun;17(2):126-35. (PMID: 9107607)
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010 May;49(5):945-54. (PMID: 20144931)
J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Feb;18(1):111-20. (PMID: 21040250)
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007 May;15(5):268-73. (PMID: 17478749)
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 Dec;(345):134-9. (PMID: 9418630)
Health Aff (Millwood). 2002 May-Jun;21(3):182-91. (PMID: 12025982)
J Arthroplasty. 2009 Sep;24(6):854-60. (PMID: 18701245)
Med Decis Making. 1993 Apr-Jun;13(2):89-102. (PMID: 8483408)
Med Decis Making. 1997 Apr-Jun;17(2):136-41. (PMID: 9107608)
N Engl J Med. 1990 Sep 20;323(12):801-7. (PMID: 2136367)
Ann Surg. 2009 Oct;250(4):590-7. (PMID: 19730238)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Apr;88(4):706-14. (PMID: 16595459)
Arthritis Rheum. 1997 Aug;40(8):1475-81. (PMID: 9259428)
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009 Sep;17(9):591-600. (PMID: 19726743)
Med Care. 2000 Jun;38(6):583-637. (PMID: 10843310)
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Jun 22;169(12):1113-21; discussion 1121-2. (PMID: 19546411)
JAMA. 1996 Oct 23-30;276(16):1339-41. (PMID: 8861994)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Jun;86(6):1328-35. (PMID: 15173310)
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997 Fall;13(4):575-88. (PMID: 9489250)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Nov;88(11):2348-55. (PMID: 17079390)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Jun;87(6):1222-8. (PMID: 15930530)
J Rheumatol. 1997 Apr;24(4):719-25. (PMID: 9101508)
Am J Med. 1998 Jul;105(1):33-40. (PMID: 9688019)
J Occup Rehabil. 2009 Dec;19(4):375-81. (PMID: 19693656)
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Sep;88(9):1975-82. (PMID: 16951114)

Date Created: 20140121 Date Completed: 20140929 Latest Revision: 20211021

20221213

PMC3897923

10.1186/1471-2474-15-22

24438051