header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF MIS PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY

Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA)



Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the MIS Anterolateral Approach to that of the MIS Posterolateral and MIS Direct Lateral Approach.

Method

A prospective randomized control trial was designed and conducted to compare the MIS Anterolateral Approach to that of the MIS Posterolateral and MIS Direct Lateral Approach. Contemporary methods for economic evaluation were used to ascertain direct and indirect costs (in Canadian dollars) along with clinical effectiveness outcomes (SF6D and Pat5D utility measures). University and hospital ethics was obtained and patients were recruited and consented to participate in the RCT resulting in the assignment of 130 patients MIS hip arthroplasty procedures. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidity, quality of life, and utility were obtained for all patients. In-hospital costing data was obtained including operating room and patient room costs as well as medication, rehab and complications. Post-discharge costs were calculated from direct and indirect costs of medication, rehab, medical costs and complications until one year post-operatively. Clinical effectiveness measures were administered at intervals until one year post-operatively.

Results

Patient groupings were similar pre-operatively with regards to demographic variables and quality of life measures (WOMAC, SF36, Pat5D). Post-operatively comparison of costs and complications were not different across the different surgical approaches (p>.05). Cost-effectiveness analyses (cost/QALY) were not statistically different (p>.05) when comparing the three MIS hip arthroplasty procedures.

Conclusion

Primary total hip arthroplasty is a cost-effective surgical procedure and compares favorably with other health interventions. Our study is among the first to compare the cost-effectiveness of different MIS surgical approaches using contemporary methods of cost-effectiveness analyses. Our data suggests that the MIS Anterolateral approach is not superior to the MIS Posterolateral or MIS Direct Lateral approach with regards to cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Our economic evaluation was sensitive to early post-op complications including dislocation and re-operation. Surgeons should select an MIS approach based on criteria including technical preference, reliable implant placement, patient safety and complication minimization.