The demand for spinal surgery and its costs have
both risen over the past decade. In 2008 the aggregate hospital
bill for surgical care of all spinal procedures was reported to
be $33.9 billion. One key driver of rising costs is spinal implants.
In 2011 our institution implemented a cost containment programme
for spinal implants which was designed to reduce the prices of individual
spinal implants and to reduce the inter-surgeon variation in implant costs.
Between February 2012 and January 2013, our spinal surgeons performed
1493 spinal procedures using implants from eight different vendors.
By applying market analysis and implant cost data from the previous
year, we established references prices for each individual type
of spinal implant, regardless of vendor, who were required to meet
these unit prices. We found that despite the complexity of spinal
surgery and the initial reluctance of vendors to reduce prices,
significant savings were made to the medical centre. Cite this article: 2015; 97-B:1102–5.
Prior cost-effectiveness analyses on osseointegrated prosthesis for transfemoral unilateral amputees have analyzed outcomes in non-USA countries using generic quality of life instruments, which may not be appropriate when evaluating disease-specific quality of life. These prior analyses have also focused only on patients who had failed a socket-based prosthesis. The aim of the current study is to use a disease-specific quality of life instrument, which can more accurately reflect a patient’s quality of life with this condition in order to evaluate cost-effectiveness, examining both treatment-naïve and socket refractory patients. Lifetime Markov models were developed evaluating active healthy middle-aged male amputees. Costs of the prostheses, associated complications, use/non-use, and annual costs of arthroplasty parts and service for both a socket and osseointegrated (OPRA) prosthesis were included. Effectiveness was evaluated using the questionnaire for persons with a transfemoral amputation (Q-TFA) until death. All costs and Q-TFA were discounted at 3% annually. Sensitivity analyses on those cost variables which affected a change in treatment (OPRA to socket, or socket to OPRA) were evaluated to determine threshold values. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.Aims
Methods
The practice of alternating operating theatres has long been used to reduce surgeon idle time between cases. However, concerns have been raised as to the safety of this practice. We assessed the payments and outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed during overlapping and nonoverlapping days, also comparing the total number of the surgeon’s cases and the total time spent in the operating theatre per day. A retrospective analysis was performed on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Limited Data Set (LDS) on all primary elective TKAs performed at the New England Baptist Hospital between January 2013 and June 2016. Using theatre records, episodes were categorized into days where a surgeon performed overlapping and nonoverlapping lists. Clinical outcomes, economic outcomes, and demographic factors were calculated. A regression model controlling for the patient-specific factors was used to compare groups. Total orthopaedic cases and aggregate time spent operating (time between skin incision and closure) were also compared.Aims
Materials and Methods
