Related Experiment Videos
The economics of preventing revisions in total hip replacement
Insights
Choosing cost-effective prophylaxis for total hip replacement infections depends on hospital volume. Palacos cement and antibiotics are cost-effective at 100 arthroplasties annually, reducing overall departmental costs.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedic Surgery
- Infectious Disease Prevention
- Health Economics
Background:
- Deep infections following total hip replacement (THR) pose significant clinical and economic challenges.
- Optimizing prophylaxis strategies is crucial for patient outcomes and healthcare resource management.
- Hospital surgical volume can influence the cost-effectiveness of different prophylactic interventions.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the most cost-effective methods for deep infection prophylaxis in total hip replacement surgery.
- To evaluate the impact of hospital arthroplasty volume on the selection of cost-effective cement and prophylactic strategies.
Main Methods:
- Comparative cost analysis of different infection prophylaxis strategies for total hip replacement.
- Evaluation of cement types (e.g., Palacos, gentamicin-impregnated cement) and antibiotic regimens.
- Modeling of cost-effectiveness based on varying annual hospital arthroplasty volumes.
Main Results:
- At an annual volume of 100 total hip arthroplasties, Palacos cement combined with systemic antibiotics proved cost-effective, reducing costs associated with cement, prophylaxis, and revisions.
- Gentamicin-impregnated cement with systemic antibiotics offers further risk reduction for revisions and represents another cost-effective approach.
- While a combination of gentamicin-impregnated cement, systemic antibiotics, and surgical enclosure provides the most effective prophylaxis, the added cost of surgical enclosure is not offset by savings from reduced revisions.
Conclusions:
- The optimal selection of cement and infection prophylaxis for total hip replacement is volume-dependent.
- For hospitals performing approximately 100 arthroplasties annually, specific combinations of cement and antibiotics offer significant cost savings.
- While advanced methods like surgical enclosures enhance prophylaxis, their cost-effectiveness is limited by the lack of substantial revision cost offsets.
Abstract:
We showed that the selection of a cost-effective type of cement and method of prophylaxis against deep infections for patients undergoing total hip replacement depended on the number of arthroplasties performed each year at individual hospitals. When 100 arthroplasties were performed each year, the use of Palacos cement and systemic antibiotics reduced the total costs to the department, i.e., the cost of cement, infection prophylaxis and revisions. The use of gentamicin-impregnated cement in combination with systemic antibiotics will further reduce the risk of revision and is another cost-effective strategy. The most effective infection prophylaxis would be achieved with a combination of gentamicin-impregnated cement, systemic antibiotics and surgical enclosure. However, the additional cost of the surgical enclosure would not be offset by cost savings due to reduced risk of revisions.