Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Total or partial knee replacement? Cost-utility analysis in patients with knee osteoarthritis based on a 2-year observational study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The European Journal of Health Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate incremental cost-utility of total knee replacement (TKR) versus unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) of the medial compartment. A 2-year non-randomised prospective observational cohort study was conducted in unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis patients scheduled for TKR (n = 431) or UKA (n = 102). Costs were identified using administrative databases and health outcomes were measured using the SF-36 and the Oxford knee score (OKS) 1 week before, 6 months after, and 2 years after surgery. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) for TKR versus UKA was calculated and its 95% confidence interval estimated using a nonparametric bootstrapping technique. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed from different perspectives. On average, from the societal perspective, the ICUR was US $65,245 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). In the scenario with costs calculated from the perspective of patients, the ICUR was $60,382/QALY. This value decreased to $4,860/QALY in the scenario with costs calculated from the governmental perspective. However, the 95% confidence interval of ICURs cannot be defined because more than 5% bootstrapped samples fell into the upper left quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane from all three perspectives. Based on the 2-year data, TKR gained more QALYs at higher costs compared to UKA. A long-term prospective study is necessary to determine cost-effectiveness of TKR and UKA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Felson, D.T., Naimark, A., Anderson, J., Kazis, L., Castelli, W., Meenan, R.F.: The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis in the elderly. The Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis Rheum. 30, 914–918 (1987). doi:10.1002/art.1780300811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sharma, L., Felson, D.T.: Studying how osteoarthritis causes disability: nothing is simple. J. Rheumatol. 25, 1–4 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  3. March, L.M., Bachmeier, C.J.M.: Economic of osteoarthritis: a global perspective. Baillieres Clin. Rheumatol. 11, 817–834 (1997). doi:10.1016/S0950-3579(97)80011-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zhang, Y., Xu, L., Nevitt, M.C., Aliabadi, P., Yu, W., Qin, M., et al.: Comparison of the prevalence of knee osteoarthritis between the elderly Chinese population in Beijing and whites in the United States: the Beijing Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis Rheum. 44, 2065–2071 (2001). doi:10.1002/1529-0131(200109)44:9<2065::AID-ART356>3.0.CO;2-Z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dillon, C.F., Rasch, E.K., Gu, Q., Hirsch, R.: Prevalence of knee osteoarthritis in the United States: arthritis data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1991–94. J. Rheumatol. 33, 2271–2279 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jordan, J.M., Helmick, C.G., Renner, J.B., Luta, G., Dragomir, A.D., Woodard, J., et al.: Prevalence of knee symptoms and radiographic and symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in African Americans and Caucasians: the Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project. J. Rheumatol. 34, 172–180 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Roux, C.H., Saraux, A., Mazieres, B., Pouchot, J., Morvan, J., Fautrel, B., et al.: Screening for hip and knee osteoarthritis in the general population: predictive value of a questionnaire and prevalence estimates. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 67, 1406–1411 (2008). doi:10.1136/ard.2007.075952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Buly, R.L., Sculco, T.P.: Recent advances in total knee replacement surgery. Curr. Opin. Rheumatol. 7, 107–113 (1995). doi:10.1097/00002281-199503000-00007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Iorio, R., Healy, W.L.: Unicompartmental arthritis of the knee. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 85-A, 1351–1364 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Berger, R.A., Meneghini, R.M., Jacobs, J.J., Sheinkop, M.B., Della Valle, C.J., Rosenberg, A.G., et al.: Results of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at a minimum of ten years of follow-up. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 87, 999–1006 (2005). doi:10.2106/JBJS.C.00568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Murray, D.W., Goodfellow, J.W., O’Connor, J.J.: The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 80, 983–989 (1998). doi:10.1302/0301-620X.80B6.8177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Newman, J.H., Ackroyd, C.E., Shah, N.A.: Unicompartmental or total knee replacement? Five-year results of a prospective, randomised trial of 102 osteoarthritic knees with unicompartmental arthritis. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 80, 862–865 (1998). doi:10.1302/0301-620X.80B5.8835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Boehler, N.M.: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. In: Sculco, T., Martucci, E. (eds.) Knee arthroplasty, pp. 113–119. Springer, New York (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gioe, T.J., Killeen, K.K., Hoeffel, D.P., Bert, J.M., Comfort, T.K., Scheltema, K., et al.: Analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in a community-based implant registry. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 111–119 (2003) doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000093004.90435.d1

  15. Robertsson, O., Borgquist, L., Knutson, K., Lewold, S., Lidgren, L.: Use of unicompartmental instead of tricompartmental prostheses for unicompartmental arthrosis in the knee is a cost-effective alternative. 15, 437 primary tricompartmental prostheses were compared with 10, 624 primary medial or lateral unicompartmental prostheses. Acta Orthop. Scand. 70, 170–175 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Knutson, K., Lewold, S., Robertsson, O., Lidgren, L.: The Swedish knee arthroplasty register. A nation-wide study of 30,003 knees 1976–1992. Acta Orthop. Scand. 65, 375–386 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Laskin, R.S.: Unicompartmental tibiofemoral resurfacing arthroplasty. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 60, 182–185 (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Robertsson, O.: Unicompartmental arthroplasty. Results in Sweden 1986–1995. Orthopade 29(Suppl 1), S6–S8 (2000). doi:10.1007/PL00003689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Laurencin, C.T., Zelicof, S.B., Scott, R.D., Ewald, F.C.: Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 15, 1–156 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Marmor, L.: Unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 75–81 (1985)

  21. Scott, R.D., Santore, R.F.: Unicondylar unicompartmental replacement for osteoarthritis of the knee. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 63, 536–544 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Rajasekhar, C., Das, S., Smith, A.: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. 2- to 12-year results in a community hospital. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 86, 983–985 (2004). doi:10.1302/0301-620X.86B7.15157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Slover, J., Espehaug, B., Havelin, L.I., Engesaeter, L.B., Furnes, O., Tomek, I., et al.: Cost-effectiveness of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty in elderly low-demand patients. A Markov decision analysis. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 88, 2348–2355 (2006). doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.01033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Soohoo, N.F., Sharifi, H., Kominski, G., Lieberman, J.R.: Cost-effectiveness analysis of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty as an alternative to total knee arthroplasty for unicompartmental osteoarthritis. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 88, 1975–1982 (2006). doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Doshi, J.A., Glick, H.A., Polsky, D.: Analyses of cost data in economic evaluations conducted alongside randomized controlled trials 1. Value Health 9, 334–340 (2006). doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00122.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Xie, F., Thumboo, J., Fong, K.Y., Lo, N.N., Yeo, S.J., Yang, K.Y., et al.: Direct and indirect costs of osteoarthritis in Singapore: a comparative study among multiethnic Asian patients with osteoarthritis. J. Rheumatol. 34, 165–171 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Oostenbrink, J.B., Koopmanschap, M.A., Rutten, F.F.: Standardisation of costs: the Dutch manual for costing in economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics 20, 443–454 (2002). doi:10.2165/00019053-200220070-00002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mittendorf, T., Merkesdal, S., Huelsemann, J.L., der Schulenburg, J.M., Zeidler, H., Ruof, J.: Implementing standardized cost categories within economic evaluations in musculoskeletal diseases. Eur. J. Health Econ. 4, 43–49 (2003). doi:10.1007/s10198-002-0149-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Murray, D., Carr, A.: Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 80, 63–69 (1998). doi:10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.7859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ware, J.E., Kosinski, M., Dewey, J.E.: How to Score Version 2 of the SF-36 Health Survey. QualityMetric, Lincoln (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Deverill, M.: The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J. Health Econ. 21, 271–292 (2002). doi:10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00130-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Manca, A., Hawkins, N., Sculpher, M.J.: Estimating mean QALYs in trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis: the importance of controlling for baseline utility 1. Health Econ. 14, 487–496 (2005). doi:10.1002/hec.944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lipscomb, J., Weinstein, M.C., Torrance, G.W.: Time preference. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell JE et al., eds. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine, pp. 214–235. Oxford University Press, New York (1996)

  34. Baltussen, R.M., Hutubessy, R.C., Evans, D.B., Murray, C.J.: Uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Probabilistic uncertainty analysis and stochastic league tables. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 18, 112–119 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Briggs, A.H., Wonderling, D.E., Mooney, C.Z.: Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ. 6, 327–340 (1997). doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199707)6:4<327::AID-HEC282>3.0.CO;2-W

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Briggs, A.H., Mooney, C.Z., Wonderling, D.E.: Constructing confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: an evaluation of parametric and non-parametric techniques using Monte Carlo simulation. Stat. Med. 18, 3245–3262 (1999). doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19991215)18:23<3245::AID-SIM314>3.0.CO;2-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Tambour, M., Zethraeus, N.: Bootstrap confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios: some simulation results. Health Econ. 7, 143–147 (1998). doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199803)7:2<143::AID-HEC322>3.0.CO;2-Q

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Fenwick, E., Byford, S.: A guide to cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Br. J. Psychiatry 187, 106–108 (2005). doi:10.1192/bjp.187.2.106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Weale, A.E., Halabi, O.A., Jones, P.W., White, S.H.: Perceptions of outcomes after unicompartmental and total knee replacements. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 143–153 (2001) doi:10.1097/00003086-200101000-00021

  40. Haverkamp, D., Breugem, S.J., Sierevelt, I.N., Blankevoort, L., van Dijk, C.N.: Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the Oxford 12-item knee questionnaire for knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 76, 347–352 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feng Xie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xie, F., Lo, NN., Tarride, JE. et al. Total or partial knee replacement? Cost-utility analysis in patients with knee osteoarthritis based on a 2-year observational study. Eur J Health Econ 11, 27–34 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-009-0154-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-009-0154-5

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation