Su Alvin W, Bogunovic Ljiljana, Johnson Jeffrey, Klein Sandra, Matava Matthew J, McCormick Jeremy, Smith Matthew V, Wright Rick W, Brophy Robert H
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri, USA.
Nemours Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, Wilmington, Delaware, USA.
Orthop J Sports Med. 2020 Mar 31;8(3):2325967120909918. doi: 10.1177/2325967120909918. eCollection 2020 Mar.
The operative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures has been associated with lower rerupture rates and better function but also a risk of surgery-related complications compared with nonoperative treatment, which may provide improved outcomes with accelerated rehabilitation protocols. However, economic decision analyses integrating the updated costs of both treatment options are limited in the literature.
To compare the cost-effectiveness of operative and nonoperative treatment of acute Achilles tendon tears.
Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2.
An economic decision model was built to assess the cost-utility ratio (CUR) of open primary repair versus nonoperative treatment for acute Achilles tendon ruptures, based on direct costs from the practices of sports medicine and foot and ankle surgeons at a single tertiary academic center, with published outcome probabilities and patient utility data. Multiway sensitivity analyses were performed to reflect the range of data.
Nonoperative treatment was more cost-effective in the average scenario (nonoperative CUR, US$520; operative CUR, US$1995), but crossover occurred during the sensitivity analysis (nonoperative CUR range, US$224-US$2079; operative CUR range, US$789-US$8380). Operative treatment cost an extra average marginal CUR of US$1475 compared with nonoperative treatment, assuming uneventful healing in both treatment arms. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated a decreased marginal CUR of operative treatment when the outcome utility was maximized, and rerupture rates were minimized compared with nonoperative treatment.
Nonoperative treatment was more cost-effective in average scenarios. Crossover indicated that open primary repair would be favorable for maximized outcome utility, such as that for young athletes or heavy laborers. The treatment decision for acute Achilles tendon ruptures should be individualized. These pilot results provide inferences for further longitudinal analyses incorporating future clinical evidence.
与非手术治疗相比,跟腱断裂的手术治疗与较低的再断裂率和更好的功能相关,但也存在手术相关并发症的风险,非手术治疗通过加速康复方案可能会改善预后。然而,整合两种治疗方案最新成本的经济决策分析在文献中有限。
比较急性跟腱撕裂手术治疗和非手术治疗的成本效益。
经济与决策分析;证据等级,2级。
基于单一三级学术中心运动医学及足踝外科医生的实践直接成本,以及已发表的结局概率和患者效用数据,构建经济决策模型,以评估急性跟腱断裂开放一期修复与非手术治疗的成本效用比(CUR)。进行多因素敏感性分析以反映数据范围。
在平均情况下,非手术治疗更具成本效益(非手术CUR为520美元;手术CUR为1995美元),但在敏感性分析期间出现了交叉(非手术CUR范围为224 - 2079美元;手术CUR范围为789 - 8380美元)。假设两种治疗方式均愈合良好,手术治疗比非手术治疗平均额外花费1475美元的边际CUR。敏感性分析表明,与非手术治疗相比,当结局效用最大化且再断裂率最小时,手术治疗的边际CUR降低。
在平均情况下,非手术治疗更具成本效益。交叉分析表明,开放一期修复对于使结局效用最大化有利,例如对于年轻运动员或重体力劳动者。急性跟腱断裂的治疗决策应个体化。这些初步结果为纳入未来临床证据的进一步纵向分析提供了推论。