Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) arthritis is a common and disabling condition that can be treated with an operative procedure. Before operative measures, patients typically undergo conservative treatment utilizing methods such as physical therapy and injections. This study aims to determine what clinical modalities are being used for preoperative evaluation and nonoperative therapy and the associated cost prior to operative intervention.

We queried Truven Market Scan, a large insurance provider database to identify patients undergoing CMC arthroplasty from 2010 to 2017. Patients were identified by common Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for CMC arthroplasty. All associated CPT codes listed for each patient during the 1 year period prior to operative intervention were collected and filtered to only include those codes associated with the ICD-9/10 diagnosis codes relating to CMC arthritis. The codes were then categorized as office visits, x-ray, injections, physical therapy, medical devices, and preoperative labs. The frequency and associated cost for each category was determined.

There were 44,676 patients who underwent CMC arthroplasty during the study period. A total of $26,319,848.36 was charged during the preoperative period, for an average of $589.13 per patient. The highest contributing category to overall cost was office visits (42.1%), followed by injections (13.5%), and then physical therapy (11.1%). The most common diagnostic modality was x-ray, which was performed in 74.7% of patients and made up 11.0% of total charges. Only 49% of patients received at least one injection during the preoperative period and the average number of injections per patient was 1.72. Patients who were employed full time were more likely to receive two or more injections prior to surgery compared to patients who had retired (47% of full-time workers; 34% of retirees).

The modalities used for the preoperative evaluation and conservative treatment of CMC arthritis and the associated cost are important to understand in order to determine the most successful and cost-effective treatment plan for patients. Surprisingly, despite the established evidence supporting clinical benefits, many patients do not undergo corticosteroid injections. With office visits being the largest contributor to overall costs, further inquiry into the necessity of multiple visits and efforts to combine visits, can help to reduce cost. Also, with the advent of telemedicine it may be possible to reduce visit cost by utilizing virtual medicine. Determining the best use of telemedicine and its effectiveness are areas for future investigation.