Medical decision-making among Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites with chronic back and knee pain: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders affect all racial and ethnic groups, including Hispanics. Because these disorders are not life-threatening, decision-making is generally preference-based. Little is known about whether Hispanics in the U.S. differ from non-Hispanic Whites with respect to key decision making preferences. METHODS: We assembled six focus groups of Hispanic and non-Hispanic White patients with chronic back or knee pain at an urban medical center to discuss management of their conditions and the roles they preferred in medical decision-making. Hispanic groups were further stratified by socioeconomic status, using neighborhood characteristics as proxy measures. Discussions were led by a moderator, taped, transcribed and analyzed using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: The analysis revealed ethnic differences in several areas pertinent to medical decision-making. Specifically, Hispanic participants were more likely to permit their physician to take the predominant role in making health decisions. Also, Hispanics of lower socioeconomic status generally preferred to use non-internet sources of health information to make medical decisions and to rely on advice obtained by word of mouth. Hispanics emphasized the role of faith and religion in coping with musculoskeletal disability. The analysis also revealed broad areas of concordance across ethnic strata including the primary role that pain and achieving pain relief play in patients' experiences and decisions. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest differences between Hispanics and non-Hispanic Whites in preferred information sources and decision-making roles. These findings are hypothesis-generating. If confirmed in further research, they may inform the development of interventions to enhance preference-based decision-making among Hispanics.

Cost-effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty in the United States: patient risk and hospital volume.

BACKGROUND: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) relieves pain and improves quality of life for persons with advanced knee osteoarthritis. However, to our knowledge, the cost-effectiveness of TKA and the influences of hospital volume and patient risk on TKA cost-effectiveness have not been investigated in the United States. METHODS: We developed a Markov, state-transition, computer simulation model and populated it with Medicare claims data and cost and outcomes data from national and multinational sources. We projected lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) for different risk populations and varied TKA intervention and hospital volume. Cost-effectiveness of TKA was estimated across all patient risk and hospital volume permutations. Finally, we conducted sensitivity analyses to determine various parameters' influences on cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Overall, TKA increased QALE from 6.822 to 7.957 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Lifetime costs rose from $37,100 (no TKA) to $57 900 after TKA, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $18,300 per QALY. For high-risk patients, TKA increased QALE from 5.713 to 6.594 QALY, yielding a cost-effectiveness ratio of $28,100 per QALY. At all risk levels, TKA was more costly and less effective in low-volume centers than in high-volume centers. Results were insensitive to variations of key input parameters within policy-relevant, clinically plausible ranges. The greatest variations were seen for the quality of life gain after TKA and the cost of TKA. CONCLUSIONS: Total knee arthroplasty appears to be cost-effective in the US Medicare-aged population, as currently practiced across all risk groups. Policy decisions should be made on the basis of available local options for TKA. However, when a high-volume hospital is available, TKAs performed in a high-volume hospital confer even greater value per dollar spent than TKAs performed in low-volume centers.