首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Sports Medicine >Cost-effectiveness of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a preliminary comparison of single-bundle and double-bundle techniques.
【24h】

Cost-effectiveness of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a preliminary comparison of single-bundle and double-bundle techniques.

机译:前交叉韧带重建的成本-效果:单束和双束技术的初步比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: There has been growing interest in anatomical reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), including the use of double-bundle (DB) reconstruction techniques. HYPOTHESIS: The DB technique will not be cost-effective when compared with single-bundle (SB) reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A decision-analysis model with input values derived from the literature was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of DB ACL reconstruction compared with SB ACL reconstruction. Effectiveness was based on the revision rate and the postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. RESULTS: Sixty-four percent of DB knees result in an IKDC score of A, compared with 54% of SB knees. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a DB reconstruction compared with an SB reconstruction was Dollars 6416 per quality adjusted life year in the baseline scenario and Dollars 64 371 per quality adjusted life year in the alternate scenario. The model is very sensitive to the proportions of IKDC A outcomes. The model is also sensitive to the utility values assigned to IKDC A and B outcomes and is less sensitive to the marginal cost of a DB reconstruction. CONCLUSION: This preliminary analysis based on published clinical results to date shows DB ACL reconstruction may be cost-effective, despite increased upfront cost. More research is needed to confirm whether there is any difference in the distribution of IKDC outcomes between the 2 techniques. Perhaps more importantly, the lack of any other demonstrated clinical benefit from the DB technique questions the clinical relevance of this difference in IKDC scores. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Revision data and longer term outcomes after DB reconstruction and more reliable clinical utility data are needed to definitively compare the cost-effectiveness of DB and SB ACL reconstruction. Studies of ACL reconstruction and other sports medicine procedures should report the distribution of outcomes data to facilitate future analyses of clinical effectiveness.
机译:背景:人们对前交叉韧带(ACL)的解剖学重建越来越感兴趣,包括使用双束(DB)重建技术。假设:与单束(SB)重建相比,DB技术将不具有成本效益。研究设计:经济和决策分析;证据级别,1。方法:使用具有从文献中得出的输入值的决策分析模型来估计DB ACL重建与SB ACL重建相比的成本效益。有效性基于翻修率和术后国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)得分。结果:64%的DB膝盖的IKDC得分为A,而SB膝盖的得分为54%。与基准线重建相比,DB重建的成本效益比在基准情景中为每个质量调整生命年6416美元,在替代情景中为每个质量调整生命年64371美元。该模型对IKDC A结果的比例非常敏感。该模型还对分配给IKDC A和B结果的效用值敏感,对DB重建的边际成本较不敏感。结论:基于迄今已公布的临床结果的初步分析表明,尽管前期费用增加,但DB ACL重建可能具有成本效益。需要更多的研究来确定两种技术之间IKDC结果的分布是否存在差异。也许更重要的是,DB技术缺乏其他任何已证明的临床益处,这质疑了IKDC评分差异的临床意义。临床相关性:需要确切的数据来比较DB和SB ACL重建的成本效益,并需要DB重建后的修订数据和长期结果以及更可靠的临床实用数据。 ACL重建和其他运动医学程序的研究应报告结果数据的分布,以利于将来对临床有效性的分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号