Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
The Buncke Clinic, San Francisco, California.
J Reconstr Microsurg. 2021 Sep;37(7):551-558. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1722761. Epub 2021 Jan 24.
Full-thickness injuries to the hand require durable soft tissue coverage to preserve tendon gliding and hand motion. We aim to investigate the cost effectiveness of hand resurfacing comparing free fascial flap reconstruction versus bilaminate synthetic dermal matrices.
Cost effectiveness was modeled using decision tree analysis with the rollback method. Total active range of motion was modeled as the common outcome variable based on systematic literature review. Costing was performed from a payer perspective using national Medicare reimbursements. The willingness to pay threshold was determined by average worker's compensation for hand disability. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted for range of motion outcomes and the costs using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.
The average cost of free fascial flap reconstruction was $14,201.24 compared with $13,674.20 for Integra, yielding an incremental cost difference of $527.04. Incremental range of motion improvement was 18.0 degrees with free fascial flaps, yielding an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of $29.30/degree of motion. Assuming willingness to pay thresholds of $557.00/degree of motion, free-fascial flaps were highly cost effective. On probabilistic sensitivity analysis, free fascial flaps were dominant in 25.5% of simulations and cost effective in 32.1% of simulations. Thus, microsurgical reconstruction was the economically sound technique in 57.5% of scenarios.
Free fascial flap reconstruction of complex hand wounds was marginally more expensive than synthetic dermal matrix and yielded incrementally better outcomes. Both dermal matrix and microsurgical techniques were cost effective in the base case and in sensitivity analysis. In choosing between dermal matrix and microsurgical reconstruction of complex hand wounds, neither technique has a clear economic advantage.
手部全层损伤需要持久的软组织覆盖,以保持肌腱滑动和手部运动。我们旨在研究比较游离筋膜瓣重建与双层合成真皮基质的手部修复的成本效益。
使用决策树分析和回退法进行成本效益建模。根据系统文献回顾,将总主动活动范围建模为共同的结果变量。从支付者的角度进行成本核算,使用国家医疗保险报销。意愿支付阈值由手部残疾的平均工人赔偿决定。使用 10000 次蒙特卡罗模拟对运动范围结果和成本进行概率敏感性分析。
游离筋膜瓣重建的平均成本为 14201.24 美元,而 Integra 的成本为 13674.20 美元,增量成本差异为 527.04 美元。游离筋膜瓣的运动范围改善增量为 18.0 度,增量成本效益比为 29.30 美元/度运动。假设意愿支付阈值为 557.00 美元/度运动,游离筋膜瓣具有高度成本效益。在概率敏感性分析中,游离筋膜瓣在 25.5%的模拟中占主导地位,在 32.1%的模拟中具有成本效益。因此,在 57.5%的情况下,显微重建是经济合理的技术。
游离筋膜瓣重建复杂手部创伤的费用略高于合成真皮基质,但结果略有改善。在基础病例和敏感性分析中,真皮基质和显微技术都是具有成本效益的。在选择复杂手部创伤的真皮基质和显微重建之间,两种技术都没有明显的经济优势。