Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 25, 2026
09:51
The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
3.7K
Calculating and comparing value in orthopaedic hip trauma: A systematic review
Lindsay Maier1, Zachary Chen1,2, Mithil Gudi1,2
1Henry Ford Health System, 2799 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA.
Journal of Orthopaedics
|February 24, 2026
Summary
Value-based comparisons of hip fracture treatments show variability. Standardized frameworks are needed for consistent cost-effectiveness analysis in orthopaedic care.
Area of Science:
- Orthopaedic Surgery
- Health Economics
- Value-Based Healthcare
Background:
- Hip fractures represent a significant healthcare burden, necessitating efficient and cost-effective treatment strategies.
- Evaluating the comparative value of different orthopaedic interventions is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes and resource allocation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and synthesize existing literature on the value comparisons of orthopaedic hip fracture treatment strategies.
- To assess the application of standardized cost-effectiveness metrics in real-world clinical data for hip fracture care.
Main Methods:
- A comprehensive literature search was performed across major databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science) for studies published between 2003 and 2024.
- Included studies compared treatment strategies using real-world clinical data and value-based economic evaluations, adhering to PRISMA guidelines.
- Data extraction focused on study design, interventions, cost perspectives, and economic evaluation methods, with outcomes analyzed descriptively using metrics like QALYs and NMB.
Main Results:
- Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, primarily evaluating surgical interventions for hip fractures.
- Cemented hemiarthroplasty demonstrated a favorable Net Monetary Benefit (NMB) over uncemented implants.
- Certain interventions like liposomal bupivacaine and tranexamic acid showed cost-effectiveness, while others, such as operative treatment in frail patients, offered minimal Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) benefit at high cost.
Conclusions:
- Significant heterogeneity exists in the calculation and reporting of value in hip fracture care.
- Future research should adopt standardized value frameworks, incorporating hospital/clinic perspectives, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for QALYs, and cost-utility ratios.
- Standardization is essential for reliable cross-study comparisons and informed clinical decision-making in orthopaedic hip fracture management.
