Health Economic Aspects

  • Michael Weißer
  • Hubertus Rosery
  • Tonio Schönfelder
Open Access
Chapter

Abstract

The costs incurred for knee and hip arthroplasty depend on the different type of treatments provided within the chain of medical care. Indirect costs of the disease, such as the incapacity to work resulting from the underlying diseases and intangible costs which cannot be evaluated in monetary terms, must also be taken into account. Patient care is financed through established remuneration systems. According to different publications, data extrapolations have shown that German statutory health insurances spent approximately 1.4 to 1.6 billion euros per year on hospital treatments for hip arthroplasty between 2003 and 2009. With regard to knee arthroplasty, expenditure for the same period was estimated at 1.0 to 1.3 billion euros per year. The direct costs for the associated inpatient stays are financed through case-based fees, which are in turn based on the actual average hospital costs. The most commonly remunerated case fees (hip arthroplasty/knee arthroplasty) have shown cost increases of a few percentage points over the last few years which are mainly due to the rising costs of personnel. In the two case-fee groups, implant costs constitute 21 % of the total cost for hip treatments and 25 % of the total cost for knee treatments. Particularly complicated cases such as infected hip endoprostheses are relatively more costly. With regard to indirect costs, the diagnosis »Osteoarthritis of hip« (ICD-10 M16) resulted in 2,585,157 days of incapacity to work amongst compulsory statutory health insurees (excluding pensioners) in 2011. For »Osteoarthritis of knee« (ICD-10 M17) the figure was almost double at 4,971,052. Some patients who are in employment are unable to return to work despite having undergone a joint replacement and either have to change profession or accept a loss of income that includes social security contributions. Osteoarthritis, which is the most common reason for hip or knee replacements, is associated with a significant, increasing and in part immeasurable disease burden. International studies have demonstrated that the disease is accompanied by a high degree of suffering on the part of the patient as the large majority (70 % or more) would be personally willing to finance the hip or knee arthroplasty at their own cost if the procedures were not included amongst those reimbursed by health insurance systems. Hospitals in Germany finance the costs of arthroplasty with one of several possible arthroplasty case fees selected according to the specific service provided and the circumstances of each case. The case fees are based on the average costs of a given treatment. The case fee figures in 2015, which were based on certain benchmarks, ranged between approximately 6,400 euros and 17,300 euros. However, case fees do not always seem to cover the hospital costs, particularly in the treatment of more complicated cases.

References

  1. AQUA-Institut (2012): Knieendoprothesenversorgung. Abschlussbericht. Göttingen: AQUA – Institut für angewandte Qualitätsförderung und Forschung im Gesundheitswesen GmbH.Google Scholar
  2. Assmann G, Kasch R, Hofer A, Schulz AP, Kayser R, Lahm A, Merk H & Flessa S (2014): An economic analysis of aseptic revision hip arthroplasty: calculation of partial hospital costs in relation to reimbursement. Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery 134(3), 413-420. DOI:  10.1007/s00402-014-1920-0.
  3. BARMER GEK Report Krankenhaus 2010. Schwerpunktthema: Trends in der Endoprothetik des Hüft- und Kniegelenks. Schriftenreihe zur Gesundheitsanalyse, Band 3. St. Augustin: Asgard-Verlag. ISBN: 978-537-44103-4.Google Scholar
  4. Bundesversicherungsamt (2008): So funktioniert der neue Risikostrukturausgleich im Gesundheitsfonds 2015/10/29/. www.bundesversicherungsamt.de/fileadmin/redaktion/Risikostrukturausgleich/Wie_funktioniert_Morbi_RSA.pdf [accessed: 03 November 2015].
  5. Bundesversicherungsamt (2014): Bekanntgabe der für das Ausgleichsjahr 2015 zu berücksichtigenden Krankheiten und Diagnosen nach § 31 Abs. 2 RSAV.Google Scholar
  6. Cross MJ, March LM, Lapsley HM, Tribe KL, Brnabic AJ, Courtenay BG & Brooks PM (2000): Determinants of willingness to pay for hip and knee joint replacement surgery for osteoarthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 39(11), 1242-1248. ISSN: 1462-0324.Google Scholar
  7. Destatis (2015): Krankheitskosten. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt. https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesellschaftStaat/Gesundheit/Krankheitskosten/Krankheitskosten.html#Tabellen [accessed: 11 November 2015].
  8. DIMDI (2015): Morbi-RSA und Gesundheitsfonds. 2015/08/13/. Deutsches Institut für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information. https://www.dimdi.de/static/de/klassi/icd-10-gm/anwendung/zweck/morbi-rsa/index.htm [accessed: 11 November 2015].
  9. Haenle M, Skripitz C, Mittelmeier W & Skripitz R (2012): [Economic impact of infected total hip arthroplasty in the German diagnosis-related groups system]. Der Orthopäde 41(6), 467-476. DOI:  10.1007/s00132-0121939-2.
  10. InEK (2009): Krankenhausentgeltgesetz – KHEntgG. http://www.g-drg.de/cms/Rechtsgrundlagen/Gesetze_und_Verordnungen/Krankenhausentgeltgesetz_KHEntgG [accessed: 10 November 2015].
  11. InEK (2014): Krankenhäuser mit einer Kalkulationsvereinbarung für DRG/PEPP oder Investitionskosten. Information correct as of: 22 July 2014. Siegburg. http://www.g-drg.de/cms/Kalkulation2 [accessed: 10 November 2015].
  12. InEK (2015a): Fallpauschalen-Katalog 2015. http://www.g-drg.de/cms/G-DRG-System_2015/Fallpauschalen-Katalog/Fallpauschalen-Katalog_2015 [accessed: 10 November 2015].
  13. InEK (2015b): Informationen nach § 6 Abs. 2 KHEntgG für 2015: Neue Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden. http://www.g-drg.de/cms/G-DRG-System_2015/Neue_Untersuchungs-_und_Behandlungsmethoden_NUB/Aufstellung_der_Informationen_nach_6_Abs._2_KHEntgG_fuer_2015 [accessed: 10 November 2015].
  14. IQWiG (2015): Allgemeine Methoden: Version 4.2 vom 22.04.2015. Köln: Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen. ISBN: 978-3-9815265-1-6.Google Scholar
  15. Jahn R, Schillo S & Wasem J (2012): Morbiditätsorientierter Risikostrukturausgleich – Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung. Gesundheitsschutz. 55(5), 624-632. DOI:  10.1007/s00103012-1470-y.
  16. Krischak G, Kaluscha R, Kraus M, Tepohl L & Nusser M (2013): Rückkehr in das Erwerbsleben nach Hüfttotalendoprothese. Unfallchirurg 116(8), 755-759. DOI:  10.1007/s00113-013-2424-z.
  17. KV Berlin (2007): GKV-WSG: Gesundheitsfonds. 2015/08/13/. https://www.kvberlin.de/20praxis/70themen/gesundheitsreform/gesundheitsfonds/ [accessed: 04 November 2015].
  18. Malzahn J (2014): [Conservative and operative treatment of working age patients with gonarthritis. Economic considerations]. Der Orthopäde 43(6), 503-506, 508-510. DOI:  10.1007/s00132-014-2295-1.
  19. Merx H, Dreinhofer KE & Gunther KP (2007): [Socioeconomic relevance of osteoarthritis in Germany]. Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und Unfallchirurgie 145(4), 421-429. DOI:  10.1055/s-2007-965552.
  20. Mujica-Mota RE, Watson L & Tarricone R (2015): Kosten-/Nutzenanalyse von rechtzeitiger vs. verzögerter primärer Hüft-Totalendoprothetik in Deutschland. [Poster].Google Scholar
  21. Phillips C & Thompson G (2009): What is a QALY? What is…? series. Hayward Medical Communication.Google Scholar
  22. Rabenberg M (2013): Arthrose. Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes. Heft 54. Berlin: Robert Koch-Institut, Statistisches Bundesamt. ISBN: 978-3-89606-219-2.Google Scholar
  23. Schulenburg, J.M. von der, & Greiner W (2007): Gesundheitsökonomik. 2. Auflage. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ISBN: 978-3161490606.Google Scholar
  24. Stargardt T (2008): Health service costs in Europe: cost and reimbursement of primary hip replacement in nine countries. Health economics 17(1 Suppl), S9-20. DOI:  10.1002/hec.1328.
  25. SVR Gesundheit (2014): Bedarfsgerechte Versorgung – Perspektiven für ländliche Regionen und ausgewählte Leistungsbereiche: Gutachten 2014. Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der Entwicklung im Gesundheitswesen (Hrsg.).Google Scholar
  26. Tuominen U, Sintonen H, Hirvonen J, Seitsalo S, Paavolainen P, Lehto M, Hietaniemi K & Blom M (2010): Is LongerWaiting Time for Total Knee Replacement Associated with Health Outcomes and Medication Costs? Randomized Clinical Trial. Value in Health 13(8), 998-1004. DOI: 10983015/10/998.Google Scholar
  27. Xie F, Thumboo J, Fong K-J, Lo N-N, Yeo S-J, Yang K-Y & Li S-C (2008): A Study on Indirect and Intangible Costs for Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis in Singapore. Value in Health 11(Supplement 1), S84-S90.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

Open Access This chapter is published under the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.de) which grants you the right to use, copy, edit, share and reproduce this chapter in any medium and format, provided that you duly mention the original author(s) and the source, include a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate whether you have made any changes.

The Creative Commons license referred to also applies to any illustrations and other third party material unless the legend or the reference to the source states otherwise. If any such third party material is not licensed under the above-mentioned Creative Commons license, any copying, editing or public reproduction is only permitted with the prior approval of the copyright holder or on the basis of the relevant legal regulations.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Weißer
    • 1
  • Hubertus Rosery
    • 1
  • Tonio Schönfelder
    • 2
  1. 1.AiM GmbH - Assessment in Medicine, Research and ConsultingLörrachGermany
  2. 2.IGES Institut GmbHBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations