No differences in cost-effectiveness and short-term functional outcomes between cemented and uncemented total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing debate regarding optimal fixation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), however cost has not been addressed as profoundly. Therefore, the current study primarily aimed to compare costs and cost-effectiveness 1 year after cemented or uncemented TKA. A secondary objective was to compare short-term functional outcomes between both groups. METHODS: A posthoc prospective observational multicenter cohort study of 60 cemented and 50 uncemented Low Contact Stress (LCS) knee systems. Outcome was evaluated using the EuroQol5D-3 L (EQ5D) index, in order to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Total costs were calculated considering direct costs within the hospital setting (inpatient cost) as well as direct and indirect costs outside the hospital. Cost-effectiveness (total costs per QALY), Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) were compared between cemented and uncemented cases at 1 year after surgery. HealthBASKET project, a micro-costing approach, represents the Dutch costs and situation and was used to calculate hospital stay. (In) direct costs outside the healthcare (medical cost and productivity cost) were determined using two validated questionnaires. RESULTS: Median costs per QALY were similar between cemented and uncemented TKA patients (€16,269 and €17,727 respectively; p = 0.50). Median OKS (44 and 42; p = 0.79), EQ5D (0.88 and 0.90; p = 0.82) and NRS for pain (1.0 and 1.0; p = 0.48) and satisfaction (9.0 and 9.0; p = 0.15) were also comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION: For this type of knee implant (LCS), inpatient hospital costs and costs after hospitalization were comparable between groups.

The reason why orthopaedic surgeons perform total knee replacement: results of a randomised study using case vignettes.

PURPOSE: End-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA) results in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) surgery. The decision to perform TKA is not well defined, resulting in variation of indications among orthopaedic surgeons. Non-operative treatment measures are often not extensively used. Aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing the decision to perform TKA by Dutch orthopaedic surgeons. METHODS: Three case vignettes, each case divided into two versions, being identical except for information on age (younger and older age), pain (mild and severe pain) or radiological OA (low and high grade) were developed. A questionnaire including these three case vignettes was sent to 599 Dutch orthopaedic surgeons, who were randomised to either one of the two versions. The orthopaedic surgeons were asked whether TKA would be the next step in treatment. Furthermore, from a list of patient factors they were asked how strong these factors would influence the decision to perform TKA. RESULTS: 54 % of the orthopaedic surgeons completed the questionnaire (n = 326). Orthopaedic surgeons indicated to perform TKA significantly more often at higher age (73.3 vs. 45.5 %, p < 0.001). In the presence of mild pain, orthopaedic surgeons were slightly more reluctant to perform a TKA compared to severe pain (57.0 vs. 64.0 %, n.s.). Mild radiological OA made surgeons more reluctant to perform TKA compared to severe OA (9.7 vs. 96.9 %, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Old age and severe radiological OA are variables which are considered to be important in the decision to perform a TKA. Pain symptoms of moderate or severe pain are unequivocal when considering a TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic/decision analysis, Level III.