Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_15 | Pages 63 - 63
7 Nov 2023
Paruk F Cassim B Mafrakureva N Lukhele M Gregson C Noble S
Full Access

Fragility fractures are an emerging healthcare problem in Sub-Saharan Africa and hip fractures (HFs) are associated with high levels of morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, increased healthcare resources utilization, and mortality. The worldwide average healthcare cost in the first-year post HF was US$43,669 per patient in a 2017 systematic review, however there are no studies quantifying fracture-associated costs within SSA. We estimated direct healthcare costs of HF management in the South African public healthcare system.

We conducted a prospective ingredients-based costing study in 200 consecutive consenting HF patients to estimate costs per patient across five regional public sector hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN). Resource use including staff time, consumables, laboratory investigations, radiographs, operating theatre time, surgical implants, medicines, and inpatient days were collected from presentation to discharge. Counts of resources used were multiplied by relevant unit costs, estimated from KZN Department of Health hospital fees manual 2019/20, in local currency (South African Rand, ZAR). Generalised linear models were used to estimate total covariate adjusted costs and cost predictors.

The mean unadjusted cost for HF management was ZAR114,179 (95% CI; ZAR105,468–125,335). The major cost driver was orthopaedics/surgical ward costs ZAR 106.68, contributing to 85% of total cost. The covariate adjusted cost for HF management was ZAR114,696 (95% CI; ZAR111,745–117,931). After covariate adjustment, total costs were higher in patients operated under general anaesthesia compared to surgery under spinal anaesthesia and no surgery.

Direct healthcare costs following a HF are substantial: 58% of the gross domestic per capita (US$12,096 in 2020), and six-times greater than per capita spending on health (US$1,187 in 2019) in SA. As the population ages, this significant economic burden to the health system will increase. Further research is required to evaluate direct non-medical, and the indirect costs incurred post HF.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 105-B, Issue SUPP_13 | Pages 50 - 50
7 Aug 2023
Bertram W Wylde V Howells N Shirkey B Peters T Zhu L Noble S Moore A Beswick A Judge A Blom A Walsh D Eccleston C Bruce J Gooberman-Hill R
Full Access

Abstract

Introduction

Approximately 15–20% of patients report chronic pain three months after total knee replacement (TKR). The STAR care pathway is a clinically important and cost-effective personalised intervention for patients with pain 3 months after TKR. The pathway comprises screening, assesment, onward referral for treatment and follow-up over one year. In a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the pathway with usual care, the pathway improved pain at 6 and 12 months. This study examined the longer-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of the STAR care pathway.

Methodology

STAR trial participants were followed-up at a median of 4 years post-randomisation. Co-primary outcomes were self-reported pain severity and interference in the replaced knee, assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Resource use from electronic hospital records was valued with UK reference costs.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_8 | Pages 9 - 9
1 Apr 2017
Wylde V Lenguerrand E Gooberman-Hill R Beswick A Marques E Noble S Horwood J Pyke M Dieppe P Blom A
Full Access

Background

Total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) are usually effective at relieving pain; however, 7–23% of patients experience chronic post-surgical pain. These trials aimed to investigate the effect of local anaesthetic wound infiltration on pain severity at 12 months after primary THR or TKR for osteoarthritis.

Methods

Between November 2009 and February 2012, 322 patients listed for THR and 316 listed for TKR were recruited into a single-centre double-blind randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive local anaesthetic infiltration and standard care or standard care alone. Participants and outcomes assessors were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was pain severity on the WOMAC Pain scale at 12 months post-surgery. Analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat and per-protocol approaches. Ethics approval was obtained from Southampton and South West Hampshire Research Ethics Committee.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 118 - 118
1 Jan 2017
Beswick A Wylde V Marques E Lenguerrand E Gooberman-Hill R Noble S Pyke M Blom A
Full Access

Robust evidence on the effectiveness of peri-operative local anaesthetic infiltration (LAI) is required before it is incorporated into the pain management regimen for patients receiving total knee replacement (TKR). To assess the effectiveness of peri-operative LAI for pain management in patients receiving TKR we conducted a systematic review, fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) and economic evaluation.

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for RCTs of peri-operative LAI in patients receiving TKR. Two reviewers screened abstracts and extracted data. Outcomes were pain, opioid use, mobilisation, hospital stay and complications. Authors were contacted if required. When feasible, we conducted meta-analysis with studies analysed separately if a femoral nerve block (FNB) was provided.

In the APEX RCT, we randomised 316 patients awaiting TKR to standard anaesthesia which included FNB, or to the same regimen with additional peri-operative LAI (60mls 0.25% bupivacaine plus adrenaline). Post-operatively, all patients received patient-controlled morphine. The primary outcome was joint pain severity (WOMAC-Pain) at 12 months. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to allocation.

Within APEX, cost-effectiveness was assessed from the health and social-care perspective in relation to quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and WOMAC-Pain at 12-months. Resource use was collected from hospital records and patient questionnaires.

In the systematic review, 23 studies including 1,439 patients were identified. Compared with patients receiving no intervention, LAI reduced WOMAC-Pain by standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.40 (95%CI −0.58, −0.22; p<0.001) at 24 hours at rest and by SMD −0.27 (95%CI −0.50, −0.05; p=0.018) at 48 hours during activity. In three studies there was no difference in pain at any time point between randomised groups where all patients received FNB. Patients receiving LAI spent fewer days in hospital, used less opioids and mobilised earlier. Complications were similar between groups. Few studies reported long-term outcomes.

In the APEX RCT, pain levels in hospital were broadly similar between groups. Overall opioid use was similar between groups. Time to mobilisation and discharge were largely dependent on local protocols and did not differ between groups. There were no differences in pain outcomes between groups at 12 months.

In the economic evaluation, LAI was marginally associated with lower costs. Using the NICE £20,000 per QALY threshold, the incremental net monetary benefit was £264 (95%CI, −£710, £1,238) and the probability of being cost-effective was 62%.

Although LAI appeared to have some benefit for reduced pain in hospital after TKR there was no evidence of pain control additional to that provided by femoral nerve block, however it would be cost-effective at the current NICE thresholds.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_2 | Pages 119 - 119
1 Jan 2017
Beswick A Wylde V Marques E Lenguerrand E Gooberman-Hill R Noble S Pyke M Blom A
Full Access

Robust evidence on the effectiveness of peri-operative local anaesthetic infiltration (LAI) is required before it is incorporated into the pain management regimen for patients receiving total hip replacement (THR). We assessed the effectiveness of LAI using a systematic review and a fully powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) with economic evaluation.

We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases for RCTs of peri-operative LAI in patients receiving THR. Two reviewers screened abstracts, extracted data, and liaised with authors. Outcomes were pain, opioid use, mobilisation, hospital stay and complications. If feasible, we conducted meta-analysis.

In the APEX RCT, we randomised 322 patients awaiting THR to receive additional peri-operative LAI (60mls 0.25% bupivacaine plus adrenaline) or standard anaesthesia alone. Post-operatively, all patients received patient-controlled morphine. The primary outcome was joint pain severity (WOMAC-Pain) at 12 months. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to allocation.

Within APEX, cost-effectiveness was assessed from the health and social-care perspective in relation to quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and WOMAC-Pain at 12-months. Resource use was collected from hospital records and patient questionnaires.

In the systematic review, we identified 13 studies (909 patients). Patients undergoing THR receiving LAI experienced greater pain reduction at 24 hours at rest, standardised mean difference (SMD) −0.61 (95%CI −1.05, −0.16; p=0.008) and at 48 hours during activity, SMD −0.43 (95%CI −0.78, −0.09; p=0.014). Patients receiving LAI spent fewer days in hospital, used less opioids and mobilised earlier. Complications were similar between groups. Long-term outcomes were not a focus of these studies.

In the APEX RCT, pain levels in hospital were broadly similar between groups, probably due to patient-controlled analgesia. Opioid use was similar between groups. Time to mobilisation and discharge were largely dependent on local protocols and did not differ between groups. Patients receiving LAI were less likely to report severe pain at 12 months than those receiving standard care, odds ratio 10.2 (95%CI 2.1, 49.6; p=0.004). Complications were similar between groups.

In the economic evaluation, LAI was associated with lower costs and greater cost-effectiveness than standard care. Using a £20,000 per QALY threshold, the incremental net monetary benefit was £1,125 (95%CI £183, £2,067) and the probability of being cost-effective was greater than 98 %.

The evidence suggests that peri-operative LAI is a cost-effective intervention for reducing acute and chronic post-surgical pain after THR.