The purpose of this study was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of outpatient versus inpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the USA, considering complication probability and the potential cost of such complications.
Methods:
A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the societal perspective to evaluate the incremental cost and effectiveness of inpatient THA compared to outpatient THA over a lifetime horizon. Effectiveness was expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs, expressed in 2019 US dollars, transition probabilities, and health utilities were derived from the literature. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold set at $50,000/QALY. 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses was performed to evaluate the effect of the various variables on the model.
Results:
In the base case, inpatient THA was more effective in terms of total utility (10.36 vs. 10.30 QALY), but also more costly ($48,155 ± 1673 vs. $43,288 ± 1, 606 for Medicare) than outpatient THA. Even with a lifetime horizon, the ICER was $81,116 per QALY and $140,917 per QALY for Medicare and private payer insurance, respectively, which is higher than the willingness to pay threshold. 1-way sensitivity analyses indicated that the variables having the most influence on the model were the utility of inpatient and outpatient THA and cost of inpatient and outpatient THA.
Conclusions:
This model determined that for a WTP threshold set at $50,000/QALY, outpatient THA is more cost-effective than inpatient THA from a societal perspective. Despite this, surgeons must weigh clinical factors first and foremost in determining if an individual patient can be safely operated on in the outpatient setting.
LearmonthIDYoungCRorabeckC.The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet2007; 370: 1508–1519.
2.
SloanMPremkumarAShethNP.Projected volume of primary total joint arthroplasty in the U.S., 2014 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am2018; 100: 1455–1460.
3.
MalahiasMAGuARichardsonSS, et al. Hospital discharge within a day after total hip arthroplasty does not compromise 1-year outcomes compared with rapid discharge: an analysis of an insurance claims database. J Arthroplasty2020; 35: S107–S112.
4.
DeCookCA.Outpatient joint arthroplasty: transitioning to the ambulatory surgery center. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: S48–S50.
ArgensonJNHustedHLombardiA, et al. Global Forum: an international perspective on outpatient surgical procedures for adult hip and knee reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am2016; 98: e55.
7.
PollockMSomervilleLFirthA, et al. Outpatient total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. JBJS Rev2016; 4: 01874474-201612000-00004.
8.
HuangARyuJJDervinG.Cost savings of outpatient versus standard inpatient total knee arthroplasty. Can J Surg2017; 60: 57–62.
9.
RichterDLDiduchDR.Cost comparison of outpatient versus inpatient unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Orthop J Sports Med2017; 5: 2325967117694352.
10.
AynardiMPostZOngA, et al. Outpatient surgery as a means of cost reduction in total hip arthroplasty: a case-control study. HSS J2014; 10: 252–255.
11.
NwachukwuBUSchairerWWO’DeaE, et al. The quality of cost-utility analyses in orthopedic trauma. Orthopedics2015; 38: e673–680.
12.
American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and American Joint Replacement Registry. Patient-Facing interim report fifth AJRR annual report on hip and knee arthroplasty data. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2018.
13.
AriasEXuJ.United States life tables, 2015. Natl Vital Stat Rep2018; 67: 1–64.
14.
ArshiALeongNLWangC, et al. Outpatient total hip arthroplasty in the United States: a population-based comparative analysis of complication rates. J Am Acad Orthop Surg2019; 27: 61.
15.
KleinGPosnerJLevineH, et al. Same day total hip arthroplasty performed at an ambulatory surgical center: 90-day complication rate on 549 patients. J Arthroplasty2016; 32: 1103–1106.
16.
MenendezMERingDBarnesCL.Inpatient dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2016; 31: 2889–2893.
17.
NelsonSJWebbMLLukasiewiczAM, et al. Is outpatient total hip arthroplasty safe?J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 1439–1442.
18.
GreenkyMRWangWPonzioDY, et al. Total hip arthroplasty and the Medicare inpatient-only list: an analysis of complications in Medicare-aged patients undergoing outpatient surgery. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 1250–1254.
19.
CullerSDJevsevarDSMcGuireKJ, et al. Predicting the incremental hospital cost of adverse events among Medicare beneficiaries in the comprehensive joint replacement program during fiscal year 2014. J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 1732–1738.e1.
20.
BaylissLECullifordDMonkAP, et al. The effect of patient age at intervention on risk of implant revision after total replacement of the hip or knee: a population-based cohort study. Lancet2017; 389: 1424–130.
21.
BarlowBTMcLawhornASWestrichGH.The cost-effectiveness of dual mobility implants for primary total hip arthroplasty: a computer-based cost-utility model. J Bone Joint Surg Am2017; 99: 768–777.
22.
den HartogYMMathijssenNMCVehmeijerSBW.Total hip arthroplasty in an outpatient setting in 27 selected patients. Acta Orthop2015; 86: 667–670.
23.
KlapwijkLCMathijssenNMvan EgmondJC, et al. The first 6 weeks of recovery after primary total hip arthroplasty with fast track. Acta Orthop2018; 89: 140.
24.
GoyalNChenAFPadgettSE, et al. Otto Aufranc Award: a multicenter, randomized study of outpatient versus inpatient total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res2017; 475: 364–372.
25.
GordonMGreeneMFrumentoP, et al. Age- and health-related quality of life after total hip replacement: decreasing gains in patients above 70 years of age. Acta Orthop2014; 85: 244–249.
26.
WolfCFYan GuNDoctorJN, et al. Comparison of one and two-stage revision of total hip arthroplasty complicated by infection: a Markov expected-utility decision analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am2011; 93: 631–639.
27.
BozicKJChiuVWSloverJD, et al. Health state utility in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2011; 26(Suppl. 6): 129–132.e1-2.
28.
PostlerAEBeyerFWegnerT, et al. Patient-reported outcomes after revision surgery compared to primary total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int2017; 27: 180–186.
29.
ShearerDWYoumJBozicKJ.Short-term complications have more effect on cost-effectiveness of THA than implant longevity. Clin Orthop Relat Res2015; 473: 1702–1708.
30.
Blue Cross Blue Shield, The health of America. Report: Planned knee and hip replacement surgeries are on the rise in the U.S. HealthCore, 2019.
31.
LuzziAJFleischmanANMatthewsCN, et al. The “Bundle Busters”: incidence and costs of postacute complications following total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 2734–2739.
32.
González-VélezAERomero-MartínMVillanueva-OrbaizR, et al. [The cost of infection in hip arthroplasty: a matched case-control study]. Rev Espanola Cirugia Ortop Traumatol2016; 60: 227–233.
33.
ReevesRASchairerWWJevsevarDS.The national burden of periprosthetic hip fractures in the US: costs and risk factors for hospital readmission. Hip Int2019; 29: 550–557.
LaasikRLankinenPKivimäkiM, et al. Return to work after primary total hip arthroplasty: a nationwide cohort study. Acta Orthop2019; 90: 209–213.
36.
ChangRWPellisierJMHazenGB.A cost-effectiveness analysis of total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the hip. JAMA1996; 275: 858–865.
37.
ShearerDWKramerJBozicKJ, et al. Is hip arthroscopy cost-effective for femoroacetabular impingement?Clin Orthop Relat Res2012; 470: 1079–1089.
38.
LodhiaPGuiCChandrasekaranS, et al. The economic impact of acetabular labral tears: a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing hip arthroscopic surgery and structured rehabilitation alone in patients without osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med2016; 44: 1771–1780.
39.
SandersGDNeumannPJBasuA, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA2016; 316: 1093–1103.
AbdelMPMillerLEHanssenAD, et al. Cost analysis of dual-mobility versus large femoral head constructs in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 260–264.
42.
ParisiTJKonopkaJFBedairHS.What is the long-term economic societal effect of periprosthetic infections after THA? A Markov analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res2017; 475: 1891–1900.
43.
NwachukwuBUBozicKJ.Updating Cost effectiveness analyses in orthopedic surgery: resilience of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 1118–1120.
44.
GrosseSD.Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res2008; 8: 165–178.
45.
LiuJSrivastavaKWashingtonT, et al. Cost-effectiveness of operative versus nonoperative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures: a decision analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am2019; 101: 35–47.
46.
MihaylovaBBriggsAO’HaganA, et al. Review of statistical methods for analysing healthcare resources and costs. Health Econ2011; 20: 897–916.
47.
NwachukwuBUBozicKJSchairerWW, et al. Current status of cost utility analyses in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res2015; 473: 1815–1827.
48.
NeumannPJCohenJTWeinsteinMC.Updating cost-effectiveness — the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold. N Engl J Med2014; 371: 796–797.
49.
SpringerBDOdumSMVegariDN, et al. Impact of inpatient versus outpatient total joint arthroplasty on 30-day hospital readmission rates and unplanned episodes of care. Orthop Clin North Am2017; 48: 15–23.
50.
ShahRPKarasVBergerRA.Rapid discharge and outpatient total joint arthroplasty introduce a burden of care to the surgeon. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 1307–1311.
51.
SchwartzAJChangYHBozicKJ, et al. Evidence of pent-up demand for total hip and total knee arthroplasty at age 65. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 194–200.
