Top

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Published in:

01-08-2011 | In Brief

In Brief: Cost-effectiveness Analyses in Orthopaedics

Authors: Patrick Vavken, MD, MSc, Thomas Bianchi, MS

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 8/2011

Excerpt

Cost-effectiveness has become increasingly important for physicians [2, 28]. However, cost-effectiveness analyses can vary considerably in quality owing to wide differences in available data on which to base the analyses. Many physicians do not have sufficient knowledge of economic analysis and access to relevant databases to appraise and interpret economic analyses, whereas economists and policymakers lack the clinical insight physicians have acquired during the years. …

Bhandari M, Richards RR, Sprague S, Schemitsch EH. The quality of reporting of randomized trials in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery from 1988 through 2000. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84:388–396.PubMedCrossRef

Bozic KJ, Rosenberg AG, Huckman RS, Herndon JH. Economic evaluation in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:129–142.PubMed

Brauer CA, Neuman PJ, Rosen AB. Trends in cost effectivenss analyses in orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;457:42–48.PubMed

Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Olchanski NV, Neumann PJ. Cost-utility analyses in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1253–1259.PubMedCrossRef

Briggs AH, O’Brien BJ. The death of cost-minimization analysis? Health Econ. 2001;10:179–184.PubMedCrossRef

Chassin MR, Galvin RW. The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA. 1998;280:1000–1005.PubMedCrossRef

Cohen DJ, Breall JA, Ko HH, Weintraub RM, Kuntz RE, Weinstein MC, Baim DS. Economics of elective coronary revascularization: comparison of costs and charges for conventional angioplasty, directional atherectomy, stenting and bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1052–1059.PubMedCrossRef

Donaldson C, Hundley V, McIntosh E. Using economics alongside clinical trials: why we cannot choose the evaluation technique in advance. Health Econ. 1996;5:267–269.PubMedCrossRef

Donaldson C, Shackley P. Economic evaluation. In: Detels R, Holland W, McEwen J, Omenn G, eds. Oxford Textbook of Public Health. Ed 3. Vol 2. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 1997:949–971.

10.

Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O’Brien BJ, Levine M, Heyland D. Users’ guides to the medical literature: XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1997;277:1552–1557.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Ed 3. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 2005.

12.

Folland S, Goodman A, Stano M. Economic efficiency and cost-benefit analysis. The Economics of Health and Health Care. Ed 6. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2010:64–84.

13.

Graves N, Walker D, Raine R, Hutchings A, Roberts JA. Cost data for individual patients included in clinical studies: no amount of statistical analysis can compensate for inadequate costing methods. Health Econ. 2002;11:735–739.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Halliday RG, Darba J. Cost data assessment in multinational economic evaluations: some theory and review of published studies. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2003;2:149–155.PubMed

15.

Hunink M, Glasziou P, Siegel J, Weeks J, Pliskin J, Elstein A, Weinstein M. Decision Making in Health and Medicine: Integrating Evidence and Values. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 2001.

16.

Kuntz K, Weinstein MC. Modelling in economic evaluation. In: Drummond M, McGuire A, eds. Economic Evaluation in Health Care: Merging Theory with Practice. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 2001:141–171.

17.

Neumann PJ, Stone PW, Chapman RH, Sandberg EA, Bell CM. The quality of reporting in published cost-utility analyses, 1976–1997. Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:964–972.PubMed

18.

O’Brien B, Gafni A. When do the “dollars” make sense? Toward a conceptual framework for contingent valuation in studies in health care. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:288–299.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Poolman RW, Struijs PA, Krips R, Sierevelt IN, Marti RK, Farrokhyar F, Bhandari M. Reporting of outcomes in orthopaedic randomized trials: does blinding of outcome assessors matter? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:550–558.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Smith RD. Construction of the contingent valuation market in health care: a critical assessment. Health Econ. 2003;12:609–628.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Taira DA, Seto TB, Siegrist R, Cosprove R, Berezin R, Cohen DJ. Comparison of analytic approaches for the economic evaluation of new technologies alongside multicenter clinical trials. Am Heart J. 2003;145:452–458.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Task Force on Principles for Economic Analysis of Health Care Technology. Economic analysis of health care technology: a report on principles. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:61–70.

23.

Torrance GW. Social preferences for health states: an empirical evaluation of three measurement techniques. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. 1976;10:129–136.CrossRef

24.

Torrance GW, Thomas WH, Sackett DL. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Serv Res. 1972;7:118–133.PubMed

25.

Vavken P, Culen G, Dorotka R. [Clinical applicability of evidence-based orthopedics: a cross-sectional study of the quality of orthopedic evidence][in German]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2008;146:21–25.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV, Elstein AS, Frazier HS, Neuhauser D, Neutra RR, McNeil BJ. Clinical Decision Analysis. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 1980.

27.

Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1253–1258.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Weinstein MC, Skinner JA. Comparative effectiveness and health care spending: implications for reform. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:460–465.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Whynes DK, Frew EJ, Wolstenholme JL. Willingness-to-pay and demand curves: a comparison of results obtained using different elicitation formats. Int J Health Care Finance Econ. 2005;5:369–386.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Wilde O. Lady Windermere’s Fan. London, England; 1893.

Title: In Brief: Cost-effectiveness Analyses in Orthopaedics
Authors: Patrick Vavken, MD, MSc
Thomas Bianchi, MS
Publication date: 01-08-2011
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 8/2011
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-1873-3

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

In Brief: Cost-effectiveness Analyses in Orthopaedics

Excerpt

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Excerpt

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2011

Letter to the Editor: Bony Increased-offset Reversed Shoulder Arthroplasty: Minimizing Scapular Impingement While Maximizing Glenoid Fixation

Case Report: Pseudotendon Formation after a Type III Flexor Digitorum Profundus Avulsion

Vitamin E-stabilized UHMWPE for Total Joint Implants: A Review

Does Texturing of UHMWPE Increase Strength and Toughness?: A Pilot Study

Do First-generation Highly Crosslinked Polyethylenes Oxidize In Vivo?

Reduced Wear of Cross-linked UHMWPE Using Magnesia-stabilized Zirconia Femoral Heads in a Hip Simulator