Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.

<h4>Background</h4>Total hip replacement for end stage arthritis of the hip is currently the most common elective surgical procedure. In 2007 about 7.5% of UK implants were metal-on-metal joint resurfacing (MoM RS) procedures. Due to poor revision performance and concerns about metal deb...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob, Martin Connock, Ngianga-Bakwin Kandala, Hema Mistry, Amy Grove, Karoline Freeman, Matthew Costa, Paul Sutcliffe, Aileen Clarke
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165021&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849435320896978944
author Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob
Martin Connock
Ngianga-Bakwin Kandala
Hema Mistry
Amy Grove
Karoline Freeman
Matthew Costa
Paul Sutcliffe
Aileen Clarke
author_facet Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob
Martin Connock
Ngianga-Bakwin Kandala
Hema Mistry
Amy Grove
Karoline Freeman
Matthew Costa
Paul Sutcliffe
Aileen Clarke
author_sort Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Background</h4>Total hip replacement for end stage arthritis of the hip is currently the most common elective surgical procedure. In 2007 about 7.5% of UK implants were metal-on-metal joint resurfacing (MoM RS) procedures. Due to poor revision performance and concerns about metal debris, the use of RS had declined by 2012 to about a 1% share of UK hip procedures. This study estimated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of metal-on-metal resurfacing (RS) procedures versus commonly employed total hip replacement (THR) methods.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>We performed a cost-utility analysis using a well-established multi-state semi-Markov model from an NHS and personal and social services perspective. We used individual patient data (IPD) from the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England and Wales on RS and THR surgery for osteoarthritis recorded from April 2003 to December 2012. We used flexible parametric modelling of NJR RS data to guide identification of patient subgroups and RS devices which delivered revision rates within the NICE 5% revision rate benchmark at 10 years. RS procedures overall have an estimated revision rate of 13% at 10 years, compared to <4% for most THR devices. New NICE guidance now recommends a revision rate benchmark of <5% at 10 years. 60% of RS implants in men and 2% in women were predicted to be within the revision benchmark. RS devices satisfying the 5% benchmark were unlikely to be cost-effective compared to THR at a standard UK willingness to pay of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. However, the probability of cost effectiveness was sensitive to small changes in the costs of devices or in quality of life or revision rate estimates.<h4>Conclusion/significance</h4>Our results imply that in most cases RS has not been a cost-effective resource and should probably not be adopted by decision makers concerned with the cost effectiveness of hip replacement, or by patients concerned about the likelihood of revision, regardless of patient age or gender.
format Article
id doaj-art-ad1dbc84847d433b96c5dc7e8927d56f
institution Kabale University
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2016-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-ad1dbc84847d433b96c5dc7e8927d56f2025-08-20T03:26:20ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-011111e016502110.1371/journal.pone.0165021Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.Ruth Pulikottil-JacobMartin ConnockNgianga-Bakwin KandalaHema MistryAmy GroveKaroline FreemanMatthew CostaPaul SutcliffeAileen Clarke<h4>Background</h4>Total hip replacement for end stage arthritis of the hip is currently the most common elective surgical procedure. In 2007 about 7.5% of UK implants were metal-on-metal joint resurfacing (MoM RS) procedures. Due to poor revision performance and concerns about metal debris, the use of RS had declined by 2012 to about a 1% share of UK hip procedures. This study estimated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of metal-on-metal resurfacing (RS) procedures versus commonly employed total hip replacement (THR) methods.<h4>Methodology/principal findings</h4>We performed a cost-utility analysis using a well-established multi-state semi-Markov model from an NHS and personal and social services perspective. We used individual patient data (IPD) from the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England and Wales on RS and THR surgery for osteoarthritis recorded from April 2003 to December 2012. We used flexible parametric modelling of NJR RS data to guide identification of patient subgroups and RS devices which delivered revision rates within the NICE 5% revision rate benchmark at 10 years. RS procedures overall have an estimated revision rate of 13% at 10 years, compared to <4% for most THR devices. New NICE guidance now recommends a revision rate benchmark of <5% at 10 years. 60% of RS implants in men and 2% in women were predicted to be within the revision benchmark. RS devices satisfying the 5% benchmark were unlikely to be cost-effective compared to THR at a standard UK willingness to pay of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. However, the probability of cost effectiveness was sensitive to small changes in the costs of devices or in quality of life or revision rate estimates.<h4>Conclusion/significance</h4>Our results imply that in most cases RS has not been a cost-effective resource and should probably not be adopted by decision makers concerned with the cost effectiveness of hip replacement, or by patients concerned about the likelihood of revision, regardless of patient age or gender.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165021&type=printable
spellingShingle Ruth Pulikottil-Jacob
Martin Connock
Ngianga-Bakwin Kandala
Hema Mistry
Amy Grove
Karoline Freeman
Matthew Costa
Paul Sutcliffe
Aileen Clarke
Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
PLoS ONE
title Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
title_full Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
title_fullStr Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
title_full_unstemmed Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
title_short Has Metal-On-Metal Resurfacing Been a Cost-Effective Intervention for Health Care Providers?-A Registry Based Study.
title_sort has metal on metal resurfacing been a cost effective intervention for health care providers a registry based study
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0165021&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT ruthpulikottiljacob hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT martinconnock hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT ngiangabakwinkandala hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT hemamistry hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT amygrove hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT karolinefreeman hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT matthewcosta hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT paulsutcliffe hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy
AT aileenclarke hasmetalonmetalresurfacingbeenacosteffectiveinterventionforhealthcareprovidersaregistrybasedstudy