Maine Medical Partners Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, Maine Medical Center, South Portland, ME, USA.
Department of Orthopedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020 Jun;29(6):e229-e237. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.01.082. Epub 2020 Apr 16.
Given the similar outcomes of various fixation constructs for single-incision distal biceps repair, a critical evaluation of the factors that drive the cost of the procedure is the key to optimizing treatment value. The purpose of this study was to quantify variation in costs for surgical treatment of complete distal biceps ruptures, as well as identify factors affecting costs.
We retrospectively identified adult patients consecutively treated surgically for complete distal biceps ruptures between July 2011 and January 2018 at a single academic medical center. Using our institution's information technology value tool, we recorded the surgical encounter total direct costs (SETDCs) for each patient. Univariate and multivariate gamma regression models were used to determine factors affecting SETDCs.
Of 121 included patients, 102 (86%), 7 (6%), and 12 (10%) underwent primary repair, revision, and reconstruction. SETDCs varied widely, with a standard deviation of 40% and a range of 58% to 276% of the average SETDC. The main contributors to SETDCs were facility utilization costs (53%) and implant costs (29%). Implant costs also varied, with a standard deviation of 16%, ranging up to 121% of the mean SETDC. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that reconstructions were 72% more costly than primary repairs (P < .001). No significant cost differences were found between cortical button and dual-suture anchor fixation (P = .058). American Society of Anesthesiologists class, body mass index, revision surgery, time to surgery, location, administration of postoperative block, and surgeon performing the procedure did not significantly affect the SETDC.
Surgical encounter and implant costs vary widely for distal biceps rupture treatment. However, no significant difference in SETDC was identified between repair with a cortical button vs. dual-suture anchor repair. The greater costs associated with reconstruction surgery should be taken into consideration.
鉴于各种单切口远端二头肌修复固定结构的结果相似,对驱动手术成本的因素进行严格评估是优化治疗价值的关键。本研究的目的是量化外科治疗完全性远端二头肌断裂的成本差异,并确定影响成本的因素。
我们回顾性地确定了 2011 年 7 月至 2018 年 1 月期间在一家学术医疗中心接受外科手术治疗的完全性远端二头肌断裂的成年患者。使用我们机构的信息技术价值工具,我们记录了每位患者的手术总直接成本(SETDC)。使用单变量和多变量伽马回归模型来确定影响 SETDC 的因素。
在 121 例纳入的患者中,102 例(86%)、7 例(6%)和 12 例(10%)分别接受了初次修复、翻修和重建。SETDC 差异很大,标准差为 40%,范围为平均 SETDC 的 58%至 276%。SETDC 的主要贡献者是设施利用成本(53%)和植入物成本(29%)。植入物成本也存在差异,标准差为 16%,范围高达平均 SETDC 的 121%。多变量分析表明,重建手术比初次修复手术的成本高 72%(P<.001)。皮质扣和双缝线锚定修复固定之间没有显著的成本差异(P=0.058)。美国麻醉医师学会分类、体重指数、翻修手术、手术时间、手术地点、术后阻滞的管理以及进行手术的外科医生均未显著影响 SETDC。
治疗远端二头肌断裂的手术和植入物成本差异很大。然而,皮质扣与双缝线锚定修复固定之间的 SETDC 无显著差异。重建手术相关的更高成本应加以考虑。