Economic evaluation provides a framework for assessing the costs and consequences of alternative programmes or interventions. One common vehicle for economic evaluations in the healthcare context is the decision-analytic model, which synthesizes information on parameter inputs (for example, probabilities or costs of clinical events or health states) from multiple sources and requires application of mathematical techniques, usually within a software program. A plethora of decision-analytic modelling-based economic evaluations of orthopaedic interventions have been published in recent years. This annotation outlines a number of issues that can help readers, reviewers, and decision-makers interpret evidence from decision-analytic modelling-based economic evaluations of orthopaedic interventions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(1):17–20

Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of intramedullary nail fixation and ‘locking’ plate fixation in the treatment of extra-articular fractures of the distal tibia. Patients and Methods. An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS), based on evidence from the Fixation of Distal Tibia Fractures (UK FixDT) multicentre parallel trial. Data from 321 patients were available for analysis. Costs were collected prospectively over the 12-month follow-up period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and net monetary benefit. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates. Results. Mean NHS and PSS costs were significantly lower for patients treated with an intramedullary nail than for those treated with a locking plate (-£970, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1685 to -256; p = 0.05). There was a small increase in QALYs gained in the nail fixation group (0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.06; p = 0.52). The probability of cost-effectiveness for nail fixation exceeded 90% at cost-effectiveness thresholds as low as £15 000 per additional QALY. The cost-effectiveness results remained robust to several sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. This trial-based economic evaluation suggests that nail fixation is a cost-effective alternative to locking plate fixation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:624–33

Aims. This 501-patient, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial sought to establish the effect of low-intensity, pulsed, ultrasound (LIPUS) on tibial shaft fractures managed with intramedullary nailing. We conducted an economic evaluation as part of this trial. Patients and Methods. Data for patients’ use of post-operative healthcare resources and time taken to return to work were collected and costed using publicly available sources. Health-related quality of life, assessed using the Health Utilities Index Mark-3 (HUI-3), was used to derive quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and QALYs were compared between LIPUS and control (a placebo device) from a payer and societal perspective using non-parametric bootstrapping. All costs are reported in 2015 Canadian dollars unless otherwise stated. Results. With a cost per device of $3,995, the mean cost was significantly higher for patients treated with LIPUS versus placebo from a payer (mean increase = $3647, 95% confidence interval (CI) $3244 to $4070; p < 0.001) or a societal perspective (mean increase = $3425, 95% CI $1568 to $5283; p < 0.001). LIPUS did not provide a significant benefit in terms of QALYs gained (mean difference = 0.023 QALYs, 95% CI -0.035 to 0.069; p = 0.474). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of LIPUS compared with placebo were $155 433/QALY from a payer perspective and $146 006/QALY from a societal perspective. Conclusion. At the current price, LIPUS is not cost-effective for fresh tibial fractures managed with intramedullary nailing. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1526–32

Aims

The aim of this study was to estimate the incremental use of resources, costs, and quality of life outcomes associated with surgical reconstruction compared to rehabilitation for long-standing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury in the NHS, and to estimate its cost-effectiveness.

Aims

To assess how the cost-effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) varies with age, sex, and preoperative Oxford Hip or Knee Score (OHS/OKS); and to identify the patient groups for whom THA/TKA is cost-effective.

Aims

The aim of the Scaphoid Waist Internal Fixation for Fractures Trial (SWIFFT) was to determine the optimal treatment for adults with a bicortical undisplaced or minimally displaced fracture of the waist of the scaphoid, comparing early surgical fixation with initial cast immobilization, with immediate fixation being offered to patients with nonunion.

Aims

A trial-based comparison of the use of resources, costs and quality of life outcomes of arthroscopic and open surgical management for rotator cuff tears in the United Kingdom NHS was performed using data from the United Kingdom Rotator Cuff Study (UKUFF) randomised controlled trial.

The aim of this study was to perform a cost–utility analysis of total hip (THR) and knee replacement (TKR). Arthritis is a disabling condition that leads to long-term deterioration in quality of life. Total joint replacement, despite being one of the greatest advances in medicine of the modern era, has recently come under scrutiny. The National Health Service (NHS) has competing demands, and resource allocation is challenging in times of economic restraint. Patients who underwent THR (n = 348) or TKR (n = 323) between January and July 2010 in one Scottish region were entered into a prospective arthroplasty database. A health–utility score was derived from the EuroQol (EQ-5D) score pre-operatively and at one year, and was combined with individual life expectancy to derive the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Two-way analysis of variance was used to compare QALYs gained between procedures, while controlling for baseline differences. The number of QALYs gained was higher after THR than after TKR (6.5 vs 4.0 years, p < 0.001). The cost per QALY for THR was £1372 compared with £2101 for TKR. The predictors of an increase in QALYs gained were poorer health before surgery (p < 0.001) and younger age (p < 0.001). General health (EQ-5D VAS) showed greater improvement after THR than after TKR (p < 0.001). This study provides up-to-date cost-effectiveness data for total joint replacement. THR and TKR are extremely effective both clinically and in terms of cost effectiveness, with costs that compare favourably to those of other medical interventions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:115–21.

Aims. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard wound management after initial surgical wound debridement in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb. Patients and Methods. An economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective of the United Kingdom NHS and Personal Social Services, based on evidence from the 460 participants in the Wound Management of Open Lower Limb Fractures (WOLLF) trial. Economic outcomes were collected prospectively over the 12-month follow-up period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Bivariate regression of costs (given in £, 2014 to 2015 prices) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with multiple imputation of missing data, was conducted to estimate the incremental cost per QALY gained associated with NPWT dressings. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were undertaken to assess the impacts of uncertainty and heterogeneity, respectively, surrounding aspects of the economic evaluation. Results. The base case analysis produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £267 910 per QALY gained, reflecting higher costs on average (£678; 95% confidence interval (CI) -£1082 to £2438) and only marginally higher QALYS (0.002; 95% CI -0.054 to 0.059) in the NPWT group. The probability that NPWT is cost-effective in this patient population did not exceed 27% regardless of the value of the cost-effectiveness threshold. This result remained robust to several sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Conclusion. This trial-based economic evaluation suggests that NPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective strategy for improving outcomes in adult patients with severe open fractures of the lower limb. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1392–1401

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of surgical fixation with Kirschner (K-)wire ersus moulded casting after manipulation of a fracture of the distal radius in an operating theatre setting. Methods. An economic evaluation was conducted based on data collected from the Distal Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial 2 (DRAFFT2) multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK. Resource use was collected at three, six, and 12 months post-randomization using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from an NHS and personal social services perspective. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates, and decision uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. In the base case analysis, surgical fixation with K-wire was more expensive (£29.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) -94.85 to 154.15)) and generated lower QALYs (0.007 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.016)) than moulded casting, but this difference was not statistically significant. The probability of K-wire being cost-effective at a £20,000 per QALY cost-effectiveness threshold was 24%. The cost-effectiveness results remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. The findings suggest that surgical fixation with K-wire is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to a moulded cast in adults, following manipulation of a fracture of the distal radius in a theatre setting. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1225–1233

Aims. To compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement versus single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Methods. Using data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial (World Hip Trauma Evaluation 8 (WHiTE-8)) in the UK, a within-trial economic evaluation was conducted. Resource usage was measured over 120 days post randomization, and cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), gained from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective in the base-case analysis. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The base-case analysis showed that high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement had a significantly higher mean cost (£224 (95% confidence interval (CI) -408 to 855)) and almost the same QALYs (0.001 (95% CI -0.002 to 0.003)) relative to single-antibiotic cement from the UK NHS and PSS perspective. The probability of the high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement being cost-effective was less than 0.3 at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds, and its net monetary benefit was negative. This finding remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. This study shows that high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement is unlikely to be cost-effective compared to single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(10):1070–1077

Aims. To compare the cost-utility of standard dressing with incisional negative-pressure wound therapy (iNPWT) in adults with closed surgical wounds associated with major trauma to the lower limbs. Methods. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective based on data collected from the Wound Healing in Surgery for Trauma (WHiST) multicentre randomized clinical trial. Health resource utilization was collected over a six-month post-randomization period using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-utility was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the robustness of cost-effectiveness estimates while uncertainty was handled using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The incremental cost of standard dressing versus iNPWT over six months was £2,037 (95% confidence interval (CI) £349 to £3,724). There was an insignificant increment in QALYs gained in the iNPWT group (0.005, 95% CI -0.018 to 0.028). The probability of iNPWT being cost-effective at £20,000 per QALY was 1.9%. The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis. Conclusion. The within-trial economic evaluation suggests that iNPWT is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to standard dressing in adults with closed surgical wounds to their lower limbs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1072–1081

Aims. The aim of this trial was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a soft bandage and immediate discharge, compared with rigid immobilization, in children aged four to 15 years with a torus fracture of the distal radius. Methods. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted from the UK NHS and personal social services (PSS) perspective, as well as a broader societal point of view. Health resources and quality of life (the youth version of the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-Y)) data were collected, as part of the Forearm Recovery in Children Evaluation (FORCE) multicentre randomized controlled trial over a six-week period, using trial case report forms and patient-completed questionnaires. Costs and health gains (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) were estimated for the two trial treatment groups. Regression was used to estimate the probability of the new treatment being cost-effective at a range of ‘willingness-to-pay’ thresholds, which reflect a range of costs per QALY at which governments are typically prepared to reimburse for treatment. Results. The offer of a soft bandage significantly reduced cost per patient (saving £12.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) -£5.30 to £19.80)) while QALYs were similar (QALY difference between groups: 0.0013 (95% CI -0.0004 to 0.003)). The high probability (95%) that offering a bandage is a cost-effective option was consistent when examining the data in a range of sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. In addition to the known clinical equivalence, this study found that the offer of a bandage reduced cost compared with rigid immobilization among children with a torus fracture of the distal radius. While the cost saving was small for each patient, the high frequency of these injuries indicates a significant saving across the healthcare system. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(6):623–630

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of cemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Methods. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted based on data collected from the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK. Resource use was measured over 12 months post-randomization using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the NHS and personal social service perspective. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was represented graphically using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The base-case analysis showed that cemented implants were cost-saving (mean cost difference -£961 (95% confidence interval (CI) -£2,292 to £370)) and increased QALYs (mean QALY difference 0.010 (95% CI 0.002 to 0.017)) when compared to uncemented implants. The probability of the cemented implant being cost-effective approximated between 95% and 97% at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds held by decision-makers, and its net monetary benefit was positive. The findings remained robust against all the pre-planned sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. This study shows that cemented HA is cost-effective compared with hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA in older adults with displaced intracapsular hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):922–928

It is becoming widely accepted that research which considers only the outcome and not the costs associated with new technologies in health care, is of limited value in making decisions about the use of scarce resources. Economic evaluation is becoming a standard feature of clinical research but many published economic evaluations fall short of best practice in their methodology. We have described the essential features of economic evaluation, using published studies in orthopaedics, in order to try to improve the ability of orthopaedic surgeons to read, understand and appraise such studies critically, and to encourage them to consider including economic evaluation in future investigations

Health economic evaluations potentially provide valuable information to clinicians, health care administrators, and policy makers regarding the financial implications of decisions about the care of patients. The highest quality research should be used to inform decisions that have direct impact on the access to care and the outcome of treatment. However, economic analyses are often complex and use research methods which are relatively unfamiliar to clinicians. Furthermore, health economic data have substantial national, regional, and institutional variability, which can limit the external validity of the results of a study. Therefore, minimum guidelines that aim to standardise the quality and transparency of reporting health economic research have been developed, and instruments are available to assist in the assessment of its quality and the interpretation of results. The purpose of this editorial is to discuss the principal types of health economic studies, to review the most common instruments for judging the quality of these studies and to describe current reporting guidelines. Recommendations for the submission of these types of studies to The Bone & Joint Journal are provided. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:147–51

Aims. The aim of this study was to estimate economic outcomes associated with deep surgical site infection (SSI) in patients with an open fracture of the lower limb. Patients and Methods. A total of 460 patients were recruited from 24 specialist trauma hospitals in the United Kingdom Major Trauma Network. Preference-based health-related quality-of-life outcomes, assessed using the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L and the 6-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-6D), and economic costs (£, 2014/2015 prices) were measured using participant-completed questionnaires over the 12 months following injury. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analysis were used to explore the relationship between deep SSI and health utility scores, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and health and personal social service (PSS) costs. Results. Deep SSI was associated with lower EQ-5D-3L derived QALYs (adjusted mean difference -0.102, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.202 to 0.001, p = 0.047) and increased health and social care costs (adjusted mean difference £1950; 95% CI £1383 to £5285, p = 0.250) versus patients without deep SSI over the 12 months following injury. Conclusion. Deep SSI may lead to significantly impaired health-related quality of life and increased economic costs. Our economic estimates can be used to inform clinical and budgetary service planning and can act as reference data for future economic evaluations of preventive or treatment interventions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1506–10

We present an economic evaluation using data from the Distal Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial (DRAFFT) to compare the relative cost effectiveness of percutaneous Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation and volar locking-plate fixation for patients with dorsally-displaced fractures of the distal radius. . The cost effectiveness analysis (cost per quality-adjusted life year; QALY) was derived from a multi-centre, two-arm, parallel group, assessor-blind, randomised controlled trial which took place in 18 trauma centres in the United Kingdom. Data from 460 patients were available for analysis, which includes both a National Health Service cost perspective including costs of surgery, implants and healthcare resource use over a 12-month period after surgery, and a societal perspective, which includes the cost of time off work and the need for additional private care. . There was only a small difference in QALYs gained for patients treated with locking-plate fixation over those treated with K-wires. At a mean additional cost of £714 (95% confidence interval 588 to 865) per patient, locking-plate fixation presented an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £89 322 per QALY within the first 12 months of treatment. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken to assess the ICER of locking-plate fixation compared with K-wires. These were greater than £30 000. . Compared with locking-plate fixation, K-wire fixation is a ‘cost saving’ intervention, with similar health benefits. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1082–9

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in young patients aged under 45 years with traumatic meniscal tears.

Aims

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of two different postoperative management approaches following surgical fixation of ankle fractures: traditional cast immobilization versus the Early Motion and Directed Exercise (EMADE) programme.