scholarly journals Cost Comparison of Outpatient Versus Inpatient Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596711769435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dustin L. Richter ◽  
David R. Diduch

Background: Outpatient unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has been shown to be safe and feasible when compared with inpatient surgery; however, no studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of performing outpatient versus inpatient UKA. Hypothesis: Significant cost savings can be achieved by transitioning UKAs from an inpatient to an outpatient procedure in an outpatient surgical facility, with no appreciable difference in complication or readmission rates. Study Design: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 25 consecutive medial UKAs was performed. A total of 10 inpatient UKAs with a mean length of stay of 1.6 days (range, 1-4 days) and 12 outpatient UKAs were included in the final analysis. A simple difference in costs incurred, reimbursements, and percentage difference between inpatient and outpatient surgery in an outpatient surgical facility was calculated. Charges were subdivided into surgical facility fees, inpatient room charges, operating room supply fees, and other fees. Secondary outcome measures included reason for greater than 1 day stay for the inpatient UKAs, complications, readmissions, and the type of regional anesthesia utilized. Results: The outpatient UKA charges were a mean $20,500 less per patient than the inpatient average charge of $46,845. The primary cost savings were attributed to the outpatient surgical facility fee, which averaged $3800 per patient, while the inpatient facility charge was 350% more expensive at $13,200 per patient (approximately $9500 savings). On the inpatient side, the average reimbursement was 55% of charges, or $25,550. For outpatient procedures, the average reimbursement was 47%, or $12,370. There was no difference between the inpatient and outpatient groups in terms of complications or readmissions. Conclusion: This work demonstrated that significant cost savings of roughly 50% can be achieved with an outpatient UKA protocol done at an outpatient surgical facility. Not only is it feasible and economically attractive to perform outpatient UKA, but it can reduce inpatient bed occupancy and resource allocation for a busy hospital.

Author(s):  
D. M. Moore ◽  
G. A. Sheridan ◽  
A. Welch-Phillips ◽  
J. M. O’Byrne ◽  
P. Kenny

Abstract Purpose Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) provides patients with an alternative treatment to TKA in isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis providing better functional outcomes and faster recovery in the short term. Our aim was to quantify revision rates, predictors of revision, mortality rate and functionality of the Oxford Phase 3 UKA in a non-designer institution. Methods This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected regional registry data. All Oxford Phase 3 UKAs performed for medial tibio-femoral osteoarthritis of the knee joint were included from a single academic institution between the period of January 1st 2006 and December 30th 2009. Kaplan-Meier survivorship curves adjusting for loss to follow-up and deceased patients were generated. Primary outcome variables included all-cause and aseptic revision. Secondary outcome variables included functional outcome scores. Patients were reviewed at 6 months, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years and 15 years. Results A total of 64 cemented Oxford phase 3 UKAs were performed between January 2006 and November 2009. Fifteen-year follow-up data were available for 51 patients, of these 12 required revision. Survival rates, adjusting for patients that were either lost to follow-up or deceased, were 87.5% at 5 years, 81.4% at 10 years and 76.4% at 15 years. The overall aseptic revision rate at the time of review was 18.75% (n = 12). The only significant predictor of postoperative WOMAC score at 15 years was the preoperative WOMAC score (p = 0.03). Conclusion The Oxford Phase 3 UKA for medial tibio-femoral arthritis has promising outcomes at 15-year follow-up with a survival rate of 76.4% in a non-designer centre. Level of Evidence III.


Author(s):  
Nicolas Pujol ◽  
Yoshiki Okazaki ◽  
Takayuki Furumatsu

ImportanceBilateral knee osteoarthritis is frequent and the best choice of treatment remains questionable, especially when the surgeon has to consider simultaneous or staged bilateral unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a systematic review assessing the clinical outcomes associated with simultaneous bilateral and staged bilateral UKA.Evidence reviewA literature search was conducted in June 2019 in Medline, PubMed and Embase. A full-text review of eligible studies was conducted by two investigators.FindingsA total of 10 retrospective studies were identified. These studies described the results of simultaneous bilateral UKA compared either to staged bilateral UKA or unilateral UKA. Results showed that the prevalence of mortality at a minimum of 30 days postoperatively, deep vein thrombosis, the rate of blood transfusion and reintervention were not higher in patients undergoing a one-stage bilateral UKA. The cost-effectiveness is in favour of doing a one-stage procedure due to the shortness of total hospital stay.Conclusions and relevanceOne-stage simultaneous bilateral UKA can be performed with preventing the postoperative complication, and result in cost savings for patients with symptomatic medial bilateral unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis. Further comparative studies are necessary to determine the best patient profile for such a surgery, and the technical considerations during surgery (consecutive surgery or simultaneous surgery with two operative teams).Level of evidenceIV.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 759-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Hoorntje ◽  
Koen L. M. Koenraadt ◽  
Margreet G. Boevé ◽  
Rutger C. I. van Geenen

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
pp. 363-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán ◽  
Primitivo Gómez-Cardero

An age younger than 60 years, a body weight of 180 lb (82 kg) or more, performing heavy work, having chondrocalcinosis and having exposed bone in the patellofemoral (PF) joint are not contraindications for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Severe wear of the lateral facet of the PF joint with bone loss and grooving is a contraindication for UKA. Medial UKA should only be performed in cases of severe osteoarthritis (OA) as shown in pre-operative X-rays, with medial bone-on-bone contact and a medial/lateral ratio of < 20%. The post-operative results of UKA are generally good. Medium-term and long-term studies have reported acceptable results at 10 years, with implant survival greater than 95% for UKAs performed for medial OA or osteonecrosis and for lateral UKA, especially when fixed-bearing implants are used. When all implant-related re-operations are considered, the 10-year survival rate is 94%, and the 15-year survival rate is 91%. Aseptic loosening is the principal failure mechanism in the first few years in mobile-bearing implants, whereas OA progression causes most failures in later years in fixed-bearing implants. The overall complication rate and the comprehensive re-operation rate are comparable in both mobile bearings and fixed bearings. The survival likelihood of the all-polyethylene UKA implant is similar to that of metal-backed modular designs for UKA. Notable cost savings of approximately 50% can be achieved with an outpatient UKA surgery protocol. Outpatient surgery for UKA is efficacious and safe, with satisfactory clinical results thus far. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:363-373. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170048


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document