Abstract
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of performing total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus nonoperative management (NM) in non-obese (BMI 18.5–24.9), overweight (25–29.9), obese (30–34.9), severely-obese (35–39.9), morbidly-obese (40–49.9), and super-obese (50+) patients.
Methods
We constructed a state-transition Markov model to compare the cost-utility of THA and NM in the six above-mentioned BMI groups over a 15-year time period. Model parameters for transition probability (i.e. risk of revision, re-revision, death), utility, and costs (inflation adjusted to 2017 US dollars) were estimated from the literature. Direct medical costs of managing hip arthritis were accounted in the model. Indirect societal costs were not included. A 3% annual discount rate was used for costs and utilities. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of THA versus NM. One-way and Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis of the model parameters were performed to determine the robustness of the model.
Results
Over the 15-year time period, the ICERs for THA versus NM were: normal-weight ($6,043/QALY), overweight ($5,770/QALY), obese ($5,425/QALY), severely-obese ($7,382/QALY), morbidly-obese ($8,338/QALY), and super-obese ($16,651/QALY). The two highest BMI groups had higher incremental QALYs and incremental costs. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggests that THA would be cost-effective in 100% of the normal, overweight, obese, severely-obese, and morbidly-obese simulations, and 99.95% of super-obese simulations at an ICER threshold of $50,000/QALY.
Conclusion
Even at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, which is considered low for the United States, our model showed that THA would be cost effective for all obesity levels. Therefore, invoking BMI cut-offs for THA may lead to unjustifiable loss of healthcare access for obese patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis.
