Malanga Gerard, Niazi Faizan, Kidd Vasco Deon, Lau Edmund, Kurtz Steven M, Ong Kevin L, Concoff Andrew L
Clinical Professor, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rutgers School of Medicine-NJ Medical School, Newark, NJ, and Founder/Partner, New Jersey Regenerative Institute, Cedar Knolls.
Medical Director, Medical Affairs, Specialty Products, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Parsippany, NJ.
Am Health Drug Benefits. 2020 Sep;13(4):144-153.
BACKGROUND: Several nonoperative options have been recommended for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA), with varying degrees of evidence. Adhering to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons clinical practice guidelines has been suggested to decrease direct treatment costs by 45% in the year before knee arthroplasty, but this does not consider the cost of the entire episode of care, including the cost of surgery and postsurgery care. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the total treatment costs after a diagnosis of knee OA, as well as the proportion of arthroplasty interventions as part of the total knee OA-related costs, and whether the total costs differed for patients who received intra-articular hyaluronic acid and/or had knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We identified patients newly diagnosed with knee OA using the 5% Medicare data sample from January 2010 to December 2015. Patients were excluded if they were aged <65 years, had incomplete claim history, did not reside in any of the 50 states, had claim history <12 months before knee OA diagnosis, or did not enroll in Medicare Part A and Part B. The study analyzed knee OA-related costs from a payer perspective in terms of reimbursements provided by Medicare, as well as the time from the diagnosis of knee OA to knee arthroplasty for patients who had knee arthroplasty, and the time from the first hyaluronic acid injection to knee arthroplasty for those who received the injection. We compared patients who received hyaluronic acid and those who did not receive hyaluronic acid injections. Patients who received hyaluronic acid injection who subsequently had knee arthroplasty were also compared with those who did not have subsequent knee arthroplasty. RESULTS: Of the 275,256 patients with knee OA, 45,801 (16.6%) received a hyaluronic acid injection and 35,465 (12.9%) had knee arthroplasty during the study period. The median time to knee arthroplasty was 16.4 months for patients who received hyaluronic acid versus 5.7 months for those who did not receive hyaluronic acid. Non-arthroplasty-related therapies and knee arthroplasty accounted for similar proportions of knee OA-related costs, with hyaluronic acid injection comprising 5.6% of the total knee OA-related costs. For patients who received hyaluronic acid injections and subsequently had knee arthroplasty, hyaluronic acid injection contributed 1.8% of the knee OA-related costs versus 76.6% of the cost from knee arthroplasty. Patients who received hyaluronic acid injections and did not have knee arthroplasty incurred less than 10% of the knee OA-related costs that patients who had surgery incurred. CONCLUSION: Although limiting hyaluronic acid use may reduce the knee OA-related costs, in this study hyaluronic acid injection only comprised a small fraction of the overall costs related to knee OA. Among patients who had knee arthroplasty, those who received treatment with hyaluronic acid had surgery delayed by a median of 10.7 months and associated costs for a significant period. The ability to delay or avoid knee arthroplasty altogether can have a substantial impact on healthcare costs.
背景:对于膝关节骨关节炎(OA)的治疗,已推荐了几种非手术方案,但其证据程度各异。有人建议遵循美国矫形外科医师学会的临床实践指南,可在膝关节置换术前一年将直接治疗成本降低45%,但这未考虑整个治疗过程的成本,包括手术及术后护理的成本。 目的:分析膝关节OA确诊后的总治疗成本,以及关节置换干预在膝关节OA相关总成本中所占比例,同时分析接受关节内注射透明质酸和/或进行膝关节置换的患者的总成本是否存在差异。 方法:我们利用2010年1月至2015年12月5%的医疗保险数据样本,确定新诊断为膝关节OA的患者。若患者年龄小于65岁、索赔记录不完整、不住在50个州中的任何一个、在膝关节OA诊断前索赔历史不足12个月,或未参加医疗保险A部分和B部分,则将其排除。本研究从支付方角度分析了医疗保险提供报销的膝关节OA相关成本,以及接受膝关节置换患者从膝关节OA诊断到膝关节置换的时间,和接受注射患者从首次注射透明质酸到膝关节置换的时间。我们比较了接受透明质酸治疗的患者和未接受透明质酸注射的患者。还比较了接受透明质酸注射后进行膝关节置换的患者和未进行后续膝关节置换的患者。 结果:在275,256例膝关节OA患者中,45,801例(16.6%)接受了透明质酸注射,35,465例(12.9%)在研究期间进行了膝关节置换。接受透明质酸治疗的患者进行膝关节置换的中位时间为16.4个月,而未接受透明质酸治疗的患者为5.7个月。非关节置换相关治疗和膝关节置换在膝关节OA相关成本中所占比例相似,透明质酸注射占膝关节OA相关总成本的5.6%。对于接受透明质酸注射并随后进行膝关节置换的患者,透明质酸注射占膝关节OA相关成本的1.8%,而膝关节置换成本占76.6%。接受透明质酸注射但未进行膝关节置换的患者所产生的膝关节OA相关成本不到接受手术患者的10%。 结论:尽管限制透明质酸的使用可能会降低膝关节OA相关成本,但在本研究中,透明质酸注射仅占膝关节OA相关总成本的一小部分。在进行膝关节置换的患者中,接受透明质酸治疗的患者手术延迟了中位时间10.7个月,且在相当长一段时间内产生了相关成本。延迟或完全避免膝关节置换的能力可能会对医疗成本产生重大影响。
Am Health Drug Benefits. 2020-9
J Orthop Surg Res. 2020-8-6
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2019-3-14
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019-1-16
Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord. 2021-3-22
J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2024-12-1
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023-10
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2022-8-30
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019-2-25
Orthop Clin North Am. 2018-7
J Arthroplasty. 2017-8-17
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2017-8-8