Cost analysis of intra-articular sodium hyaluronate treatment in knee osteoarthritis patients who failed conservative treatment.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Failed conservative treatments of knee osteoarthritis (OA) in the elderly have traditionally been treated with TKA (Total Knee Arthroplasty). Although TKA is a gold standard and cost-effective treatment in elderly patients, it should be considered as the last resource for patients with pain that cannot be controlled by the usual conservative therapeutic approaches. Numerous studies showed that intra-articular Sodium Hyaluronate (IA-HA) (Hyalgan) is effective for treatment in various stages of knee OA. OBJECTIVES: To compare cost of treatment between two groups of knee OA patients who failed conservative treatments. The first group includes the patients who responded to IA-HA treatment leading to delay or cancel surgical treatments (response group). The second group includes the patients who did not respond to IA-HA treatment and they had to undergo surgical procedures (non-response group). MATERIAL AND METHOD: A cost analysis from the retrospective data in Police General Hospital from year 2001-2004. One hundred and eighty three patients with knee OA (208 knees) who failed conservative treatments and did not have contraindications for surgery were enrolled. All patients were treated with one course of three IA-HA injections (500-730 KDA, Hyalgan) at weekly intervals and followed up for a minimum 2-year period. In case of successful treatment (response group), repeated doses were recommended. If the patients did not improve in the average Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (the average WOMAC) score within one month after completion of the injections, they would be classified as a non-response group and the surgical procedures would be considered. Cost of direct medical costs (drugs), hospitalization, and resource utilization were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred and forty six patients (164 knees) responded to the treatment and did not need any surgical procedures within the 2-year follow-up period. Thirty-seven patients (44 knees) did not respond and needed surgical procedures. In the response group, 83 patients repeated the second course of treatment and 14 patients repeated the third course. The total average cost for the response group were 47,044.18 Baht per patient, which was an average cost of IA-HA; 12,240.41 Baht and an average cost of other medications following the injection of 34, 803.77 Baht. The ratio of the IA-HA cost and medications following the injection cost was 1:2.84. In the non-response group, the total average cost was 144,884 Baht per patient including average cost of surgery of 135,559.95 Baht per patient or 113,993.59 Baht per knee and cost of IA-HA treatment of 9,324 Baht per patient, which was only 6.44% of the total costs of treatment. However, when considered in the response group, the IA-HA treatment provided cost saving from cancellation or delayed surgical procedures at 63.26%. CONCLUSION: IA-HA should be considered as a medical intervention before surgical procedures in knee OA patients who failed conservative treatments. Even though the cost of IA-HA treatment would increase the total costs of treatment and some patients might fail, it was only 6.44% of the total costs. On the other hand, if patients responded to IA-HA treatment, then the surgical procedures were not required. This treatment could save the cost from cancellation or delayed surgical procedures at 63.26%.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».