We have located links that may give you full text access.
The Cost and Outcome Effectiveness of Total Hip Replacement: Technique Choice and Volume-Output Effects Matter.
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2016 December
BACKGROUND: Total hip replacement (THR) must be managed in a more sustainable manner. More cost-effective surgical techniques and the centralization/regionalization of services are two solutions. The former requires an assessment of newer minimally invasive and muscle-sparing surgical techniques. The latter necessitates an effective volume-outcome (VO) relationship. Prior studies have failed to evaluate and control for the VO relation.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative cost and outcome effectiveness of two minimally invasive and one muscle-sparing techniques while evaluating and controlling for a potentially endogenous VO relation.
METHODS: An all payer claims database for all THR performed in Maine in 2011 was used. The cost and outcome effectiveness of newer minimally invasive (modified Hardinge) and muscle-sparing (modified Watson-Jones) techniques were compared with the standard bearer posterior minimally invasive method. Using regression analysis, the outcomes analyzed were as follows: total costs, length of hospital stay, nursing care and home discharges, and use of physical therapy. Regression analysis was also used to evaluate and control for VO effects.
RESULTS: (1) Newer muscle-sparing and minimally invasive approaches are substantially more effective; (2) irrespective of technique, higher volume surgeons are more effective; (3) technique-specific VO effects for more complex techniques exist and show substantial savings when yearly volume exceeds 30-50; and (4) the anterolateral muscle-sparing technique is accessible to the average surgeon.
CONCLUSION: Reliance on newer surgical techniques and centralization/regionalization of THR services can reduce costs.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the relative cost and outcome effectiveness of two minimally invasive and one muscle-sparing techniques while evaluating and controlling for a potentially endogenous VO relation.
METHODS: An all payer claims database for all THR performed in Maine in 2011 was used. The cost and outcome effectiveness of newer minimally invasive (modified Hardinge) and muscle-sparing (modified Watson-Jones) techniques were compared with the standard bearer posterior minimally invasive method. Using regression analysis, the outcomes analyzed were as follows: total costs, length of hospital stay, nursing care and home discharges, and use of physical therapy. Regression analysis was also used to evaluate and control for VO effects.
RESULTS: (1) Newer muscle-sparing and minimally invasive approaches are substantially more effective; (2) irrespective of technique, higher volume surgeons are more effective; (3) technique-specific VO effects for more complex techniques exist and show substantial savings when yearly volume exceeds 30-50; and (4) the anterolateral muscle-sparing technique is accessible to the average surgeon.
CONCLUSION: Reliance on newer surgical techniques and centralization/regionalization of THR services can reduce costs.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app