Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2022; 35(02): 113-121
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1713353
Original Article

Total Hospital Costs and Readmission Rate of Patient-Specific Instrument in Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients

Stephen Thomas
1   Greater Pittsburgh Orthopedic Associates, Moon Township, Pennsylvania
,
Ankur Patel 
2   Orthopaedic Division, Department of Orthopedic Reconstruction, Smith and Nephew Inc, Fort Worth, Texas
,
Corey Patrick
2   Orthopaedic Division, Department of Orthopedic Reconstruction, Smith and Nephew Inc, Fort Worth, Texas
,
Gary Delhougne
2   Orthopaedic Division, Department of Orthopedic Reconstruction, Smith and Nephew Inc, Fort Worth, Texas
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Despite advancements in surgical technique and component design, implant loosening, stiffness, and instability remain leading causes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) failure. Patient-specific instruments (PSI) aid in surgical precision and in implant positioning and ultimately reduce readmissions and revisions in TKA. The objective of the study was to evaluate total hospital cost and readmission rate at 30, 60, 90, and 365 days in PSI-guided TKA patients. We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent a primary TKA for osteoarthritis from the Premier Perspective Database between 2014 and 2017 Q2. TKA with PSI patients were identified using appropriate keywords from billing records and compared against patients without PSI. Patients were excluded if they were < 21 years of age; outpatient hospital discharges; evidence of revision TKA; bilateral TKA in same discharge or different discharges. 1:1 propensity score matching was used to control patients, hospital, and clinical characteristics. Generalized Estimating Equation model with appropriate distribution and link function were used to estimate hospital related cost while logistic regression models were used to estimate 30, 60, and 90 days and 1-year readmission rate. The study matched 3,358 TKAs with PSI with TKA without PSI patients. Mean total hospital costs were statistically significantly (p < 0.0001) lower for TKA with PSI ($14,910; 95% confidence interval [CI]: $14,735–$15,087) than TKA without PSI patients ($16,018; 95% CI: $15,826–$16,212). TKA with PSI patients were 31% (odds ratio [OR]: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51–0.95; p-value = 0.0218) less likely to be readmitted at 30 days; 35% (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.50–0.86; p-value = 0.0022) less likely to be readmitted at 60 days; 32% (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.53–0.88; p-value = 0.0031) less likely to be readmitted at 90 days; 28% (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.60–0.86; p-value = 0.0004) less likely to be readmitted at 365 days than TKA without PSI patients. Hospitals and health care professionals can use retrospective real-world data to make informed decisions on using PSI to reduce hospital cost and readmission rate, and improve outcomes in TKA patients.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty - patient-specific instrument - total hospital cost - readmission rate


Publication History

Received: 29 January 2020

Accepted: 02 May 2020

Article published online:
29 June 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Postler A, Lützner C, Beyer F, Tille E, Lützner J. Analysis of total knee arthroplasty revision causes. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2018; 19 (01) 55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (04) 780-785
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Schroer WC, Berend KR, Lombardi AV. et al. Why are total knees failing today? Etiology of total knee revision in 2010 and 2011. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (08) 116-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Dalury DF, Pomeroy DL, Gorab RS, Adams MJ. Why are total knee arthroplasties being revised?. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (08) 120-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Le DH, Goodman SB, Maloney WJ, Huddleston JI. Current modes of failure in TKA: infection, instability, and stiffness predominate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (07) 2197-2200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bhandari M, Smith J, Miller LE, Block JE. Clinical and economic burden of revision knee arthroplasty. Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord 2012; 5: 89-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 George J, Chughtai M, Khlopas A. et al. Readmission, reoperation, and complications: total hip vs total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (03) 655-660
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Ramkumar PN, Chu CT, Harris JD. et al. Causes and rates of unplanned readmissions after elective primary total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Orthop 2015; 44 (09) 397-405
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kurtz SM, Lau EC, Ong KL, Adler EM, Kolisek FR, Manley MT. Which hospital and clinical factors drive 30- and 90-day readmission after TKA?. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (10) 2099-2107
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center. Computer-assisted navigation for total knee arthroplasty. Technology Assessment Feb 2007; Volume 22, Tab 10. Accessed May 15, 2020 at: https://www.bluecrossma.com/common/en_US/medical_policies/594%20Computer-Assisted%20Navigation%20Orthopedic%20Procedure%20prn.pdf
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Noble Jr JW, Moore CA, Liu N. The value of patient-matched instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27 (01) 153-155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tang Q, Shang P, Zheng G, Xu HZ, Liu HX. Extramedullary versus intramedullary femoral alignment technique in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Orthop Surg Res 2017; 12 (01) 82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Jensen K, Graf BK. The effects of knee effusion on quadriceps strength and knee intraarticular pressure. Arthroscopy 1993; 9 (01) 52-56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 James JN. Retrospective Cohort Study: Strengths and Weaknesses. Tufts Open Courseware. Tufts University. Accessed August 2, 2017 at: https://web.archive.org/web/20170512164859/http://ocw.tufts.edu/Content/1/lecturenotes/194039/194062
    Google Scholar