The cost-effectiveness of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for rotator cuff tear arthropathy

Marcus P. Coe, R. Michael Greiwe, Rohan Joshi, Benjamin M. Snyder, Lauren Simpson, Anna N.A. Tosteson, Christopher S. Ahmad, William N. Levine, John Erik Bell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Hemiarthroplasty (humeral head replacement [HHR]) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are surgical options for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). RSA may provide better pain relief and functional outcomes, but it costs more and may have a higher complication rate. The goal of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of these two treatments and to use sensitivity analysis to determine the drivers of the model. Materials and methods: A Markov decision model was used. Outcome and complication probabilities were obtained from existing literature. Costs were based on average Medicare reimbursement and implant prices. Utilities were derived from responses to health state surveys (Short Form 6D) from 31 patients at one institution who underwent RSA or HHR for CTA. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were used to compare treatments. Results: Our model showed RSA could be a cost-effective strategy for treatment of CTA, using $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained as a cutoff and the Short Form 6D for utilities. The model was extremely sensitive to the complication rate and the utility of each procedure and was also sensitive to implant price, with an implant price <$13,000 making RSA cost-effective. Conclusions: Currently available cost and outcome data show that RSA could be a cost-effective alternative to HHR for CTA. The cost-effectiveness of RSA depends most on the health utility gained from the operation, the utility lost due to complications from the operation, and the cost of the implant. Dropping the implant price to <$7,000 increases cost-effectiveness to <$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Further head-to-head studies evaluating the clinical and quality of life outcomes of these two treatments are warranted.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1278-1288
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Volume21
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Hemiarthroplasty
Arthroplasty
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Humeral Head
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Medicare
Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy
Health Surveys
Therapeutics
Quality of Life
Pain
Health

Keywords

  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Cuff tear arthropathy
  • Economic decision model
  • Level III
  • Reverse shoulder arthroplasty
  • Shoulder hemiarthroplasty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

The cost-effectiveness of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for rotator cuff tear arthropathy. / Coe, Marcus P.; Greiwe, R. Michael; Joshi, Rohan; Snyder, Benjamin M.; Simpson, Lauren; Tosteson, Anna N.A.; Ahmad, Christopher S.; Levine, William N.; Bell, John Erik.

In: Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Vol. 21, No. 10, 01.10.2012, p. 1278-1288.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Coe, Marcus P. ; Greiwe, R. Michael ; Joshi, Rohan ; Snyder, Benjamin M. ; Simpson, Lauren ; Tosteson, Anna N.A. ; Ahmad, Christopher S. ; Levine, William N. ; Bell, John Erik. / The cost-effectiveness of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for rotator cuff tear arthropathy. In: Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2012 ; Vol. 21, No. 10. pp. 1278-1288.
@article{65f8766e66b14206906f121167dabe69,
title = "The cost-effectiveness of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for rotator cuff tear arthropathy",
abstract = "Background: Hemiarthroplasty (humeral head replacement [HHR]) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are surgical options for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). RSA may provide better pain relief and functional outcomes, but it costs more and may have a higher complication rate. The goal of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of these two treatments and to use sensitivity analysis to determine the drivers of the model. Materials and methods: A Markov decision model was used. Outcome and complication probabilities were obtained from existing literature. Costs were based on average Medicare reimbursement and implant prices. Utilities were derived from responses to health state surveys (Short Form 6D) from 31 patients at one institution who underwent RSA or HHR for CTA. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were used to compare treatments. Results: Our model showed RSA could be a cost-effective strategy for treatment of CTA, using $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained as a cutoff and the Short Form 6D for utilities. The model was extremely sensitive to the complication rate and the utility of each procedure and was also sensitive to implant price, with an implant price <$13,000 making RSA cost-effective. Conclusions: Currently available cost and outcome data show that RSA could be a cost-effective alternative to HHR for CTA. The cost-effectiveness of RSA depends most on the health utility gained from the operation, the utility lost due to complications from the operation, and the cost of the implant. Dropping the implant price to <$7,000 increases cost-effectiveness to <$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Further head-to-head studies evaluating the clinical and quality of life outcomes of these two treatments are warranted.",
keywords = "Cost-effectiveness, Cuff tear arthropathy, Economic decision model, Level III, Reverse shoulder arthroplasty, Shoulder hemiarthroplasty",
author = "Coe, {Marcus P.} and Greiwe, {R. Michael} and Rohan Joshi and Snyder, {Benjamin M.} and Lauren Simpson and Tosteson, {Anna N.A.} and Ahmad, {Christopher S.} and Levine, {William N.} and Bell, {John Erik}",
year = "2012",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jse.2011.10.010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "1278--1288",
journal = "Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery",
issn = "1058-2746",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The cost-effectiveness of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty for rotator cuff tear arthropathy

AU - Coe, Marcus P.

AU - Greiwe, R. Michael

AU - Joshi, Rohan

AU - Snyder, Benjamin M.

AU - Simpson, Lauren

AU - Tosteson, Anna N.A.

AU - Ahmad, Christopher S.

AU - Levine, William N.

AU - Bell, John Erik

PY - 2012/10/1

Y1 - 2012/10/1

N2 - Background: Hemiarthroplasty (humeral head replacement [HHR]) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are surgical options for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). RSA may provide better pain relief and functional outcomes, but it costs more and may have a higher complication rate. The goal of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of these two treatments and to use sensitivity analysis to determine the drivers of the model. Materials and methods: A Markov decision model was used. Outcome and complication probabilities were obtained from existing literature. Costs were based on average Medicare reimbursement and implant prices. Utilities were derived from responses to health state surveys (Short Form 6D) from 31 patients at one institution who underwent RSA or HHR for CTA. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were used to compare treatments. Results: Our model showed RSA could be a cost-effective strategy for treatment of CTA, using $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained as a cutoff and the Short Form 6D for utilities. The model was extremely sensitive to the complication rate and the utility of each procedure and was also sensitive to implant price, with an implant price <$13,000 making RSA cost-effective. Conclusions: Currently available cost and outcome data show that RSA could be a cost-effective alternative to HHR for CTA. The cost-effectiveness of RSA depends most on the health utility gained from the operation, the utility lost due to complications from the operation, and the cost of the implant. Dropping the implant price to <$7,000 increases cost-effectiveness to <$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Further head-to-head studies evaluating the clinical and quality of life outcomes of these two treatments are warranted.

AB - Background: Hemiarthroplasty (humeral head replacement [HHR]) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are surgical options for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). RSA may provide better pain relief and functional outcomes, but it costs more and may have a higher complication rate. The goal of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of these two treatments and to use sensitivity analysis to determine the drivers of the model. Materials and methods: A Markov decision model was used. Outcome and complication probabilities were obtained from existing literature. Costs were based on average Medicare reimbursement and implant prices. Utilities were derived from responses to health state surveys (Short Form 6D) from 31 patients at one institution who underwent RSA or HHR for CTA. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were used to compare treatments. Results: Our model showed RSA could be a cost-effective strategy for treatment of CTA, using $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained as a cutoff and the Short Form 6D for utilities. The model was extremely sensitive to the complication rate and the utility of each procedure and was also sensitive to implant price, with an implant price <$13,000 making RSA cost-effective. Conclusions: Currently available cost and outcome data show that RSA could be a cost-effective alternative to HHR for CTA. The cost-effectiveness of RSA depends most on the health utility gained from the operation, the utility lost due to complications from the operation, and the cost of the implant. Dropping the implant price to <$7,000 increases cost-effectiveness to <$50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Further head-to-head studies evaluating the clinical and quality of life outcomes of these two treatments are warranted.

KW - Cost-effectiveness

KW - Cuff tear arthropathy

KW - Economic decision model

KW - Level III

KW - Reverse shoulder arthroplasty

KW - Shoulder hemiarthroplasty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84866147392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84866147392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jse.2011.10.010

DO - 10.1016/j.jse.2011.10.010

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 1278

EP - 1288

JO - Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

JF - Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

SN - 1058-2746

IS - 10

ER -