Suppr超能文献

髋关节注射中影像引导的应用趋势。

Trends in Utilization of Image Guidance for Hip Joint Injections.

机构信息

Relevé Sports Medicine, Winter Haven, Florida.

Orthopedic and Sports Medicine Institute, Coral Gables, Florida; and.

出版信息

Clin J Sport Med. 2021 Jul 1;31(4):374-378. doi: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000781.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate trends in utilization of image guidance for intraarticular hip injections and to compare the cost efficiency of ultrasound-, fluoroscopic-, and landmark-guided injections in the management of hip osteoarthritis (OA) and femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

DESIGN

Retrospective descriptive epidemiology study.

SETTING

The information was collected from Humana private payer insurance claims database encompassing all practice settings.

PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS

A total of 302 855 patients for years 2007 to 2015.

INTERVENTIONS OR ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS OR INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

Primary diagnosis of hip OA or FAI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Injection type [corticosteroid (CS) or hyaluronic acid (HA)], imaging modality (landmark, ultrasound, or fluoroscopic guidance), and costs.

RESULTS

Landmark-guided CS and HA injections for the management of hip OA decreased, whereas fluoroscopic and ultrasound guidance increased. Similar trends were demonstrated in the management of FAI using CS. In the management of FAI using HA, landmark- and ultrasound-guided injections decreased and fluoroscopic-guided injections increased. Cost analysis revealed lower reimbursement of landmark and ultrasound guidance compared with fluoroscopic guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

During the study period, there was an increase in the use of image guidance and decline in landmark guidance for the treatment of OA and FAI using CS and HA. Fluoroscopic guidance demonstrated increased reimbursement compared with landmark and fluoroscopic guidance. There is an opportunity to mitigate cost and reduce radiation exposure by using ultrasound-guided injections rather than fluoroscopic guidance.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估关节内髋关节注射中图像引导的使用趋势,并比较超声、透视和体表标志引导在髋关节骨关节炎(OA)和股骨髋臼撞击症(FAI)治疗中的成本效益。

设计

回顾性描述性流行病学研究。

设置

信息来自 Humana 私人支付者保险索赔数据库,涵盖所有实践环境。

患者或参与者

2007 年至 2015 年共有 302855 名患者。

干预或评估风险因素或自变量

髋关节 OA 或 FAI 的主要诊断。

主要观察结果

注射类型[皮质类固醇(CS)或透明质酸(HA)]、成像方式(体表标志、超声或透视引导)和成本。

结果

用于治疗髋 OA 的体表标志引导 CS 和 HA 注射减少,而透视和超声引导增加。在使用 CS 治疗 FAI 时也显示出类似的趋势。在使用 HA 治疗 FAI 时,体表标志和超声引导注射减少,透视引导注射增加。成本分析显示,与透视引导相比,体表标志和超声引导的报销金额较低。

结论

在研究期间,使用图像引导治疗 OA 和 FAI 的 CS 和 HA 的使用增加,而体表标志引导的使用减少。透视引导的报销金额高于体表标志和超声引导。使用超声引导注射而不是透视引导可以降低成本并减少辐射暴露。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验