Marginal contribution of UKS- versus TKA in varus arthritis of the knee

Kasch, Richard; Merk, Sebastian; Drescher, Wolf; Schulz, Arndt P.; Kayser, R.; Skripitz, Ralf; Fröhlich, Susanne; Lahm, A.; Merk, H.; Fleßa, Steffen

doi:10.1007/s00402-012-1535-2

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3, 17487 Greifswald) approved the study (BB 010/13) and waived written informed consent, without restrictions on data. In the methods section we followed previously published protocols, describing in detail design, patient selection, outcome measures and the calculation of costs [24,30]. All patients (n = 106) undergoing revision TKA were treated in a university hospital providing primary medical care and specialized procedures in the period of 39 months ending Jan. 1, 2012.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When the electronic patient file was incomplete or inconsistent with regard to eligibility, or patient outcome, we additionally retrieved the paper files from the hospital’s archive to obtain more data [24,30]”.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following Assmann et al and Kasch et al patient demographics (age, gender), clinical measures (pathogens, length of stay, operative time, number of comorbidities, extent of revision), consumption of hospital resources, and economic data were retrospectively evaluated case-by-case [24,30]. Following international guidelines septic TKA revisions are performed as two-stage procedures with two hospital stays, which we analyzed separately (septic explantation versus septic implantation) [17,18].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As described in detail previously the analysis included variable and case fixed costs, following Kasch et al [24,29,31,41]. “Those costs could be directly related to an individual case and can be influenced directly.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patient management has more and more been affected by financial restrictions [15,24–27]. Most hospitals provide primary care, performing a wide range of different basic procedures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Comparative Analysis of Direct Hospital Care Costs between Aseptic and Two-Stage Septic Knee Revision

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe most common intermediate and long-term complications of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) include aseptic and septic failure of prosthetic joints. These complications cause suffering, and their management is expensive. In the future the number of revision TKA will increase, which involves a greater financial burden. Little concrete data about direct costs for aseptic and two-stage septic knee revisions with an in depth-analysis of septic explantation and implantation is available.Questions/PurposesA retrospective consecutive analysis of the major partial costs involved in revision TKA for aseptic and septic failure was undertaken to compare 1) demographic and clinical characteristics, and 2) variable direct costs (from a hospital department’s perspective) between patients who underwent single-stage aseptic and two-stage septic revision of TKA in a hospital providing maximum care. We separately analyze the explantation and implantation procedures in septic revision cases and identify the major cost drivers of knee revision operations.MethodsA total of 106 consecutive patients (71 aseptic and 35 septic) was included. All direct costs of diagnosis, surgery, and treatment from the hospital department’s perspective were calculated as real purchase prices. Personnel involvement was calculated in units of minutes.ResultsAseptic versus septic revisions differed significantly in terms of length of hospital stay (15.2 vs. 39.9 days), number of reported secondary diagnoses (6.3 vs. 9.8) and incision-suture time (108.3 min vs. 193.2 min). The management of septic revision TKA was significantly more expensive than that of aseptic failure ($12,223.79 vs. $6,749.43) (p <.001).On the level of the separate hospitalizations the mean direct costs of explantation stage ($4,540.46) were lower than aseptic revision TKA ($6,749.43) which were again lower than those of the septic implantation stage ($7,683.33). All mean costs of stays were not comparable as they differ significantly (p <.001). Major cost drivers were the cost of the implant and general staff. The septic implantation part was on average $3,142.87 more expensive than septic explantations (p <.001).ConclusionsOur study for the first time provides a detailed analysis of the major direct case costs of aseptic and septic revision TKA from the hospital-department’s perspective which is the basis for long-term orientated decision making. In the future, our cost analysis has to be interpreted in relation to reimbursement estimates. This is important to check whether revision TKA lead to a financial loss for the operating department.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patient management has more and more been affected by financial restrictions [15,24–27]. Most hospitals provide primary care, performing a wide range of different basic procedures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Comparative Analysis of Direct Hospital Care Costs between Aseptic and Two-Stage Septic Knee Revision

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Teleradiology from the provider’s perspective—cost analysis for a mid-size university hospital

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

An economic analysis of aseptic revision hip arthroplasty: Calculation of partial hospital costs in relation to reimbursement

Assmann

Kasch

Hofer

et al. 2014

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our study for the first time provides a detailed analysis of the major direct case costs of THR revision for aseptic loosening from the provider's perspective. Our findings suggest that these revision operations could be performed cost-beneficially by the operating unit. From an economic perspective, cases with higher cost weights are more favorable for a hospital. These results need to be confirmed in multicenter studies.

show abstract

Marginal contribution of UKS- versus TKA in varus arthritis of the knee

Cited by 11 publications

References 28 publications

Comparative Analysis of Direct Hospital Care Costs between Aseptic and Two-Stage Septic Knee Revision

Comparative Analysis of Direct Hospital Care Costs between Aseptic and Two-Stage Septic Knee Revision

Teleradiology from the provider’s perspective—cost analysis for a mid-size university hospital

An economic analysis of aseptic revision hip arthroplasty: Calculation of partial hospital costs in relation to reimbursement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About