↓ Skip to main content

Economic Decision Model Suggests Total Shoulder Arthroplasty is Superior to Hemiarthroplasty in Young Patients with End-stage Shoulder Arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
Title
Economic Decision Model Suggests Total Shoulder Arthroplasty is Superior to Hemiarthroplasty in Young Patients with End-stage Shoulder Arthritis
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-4991-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suneel B. Bhat, Mark Lazarus, Charles Getz, Gerald R. Williams, Surena Namdari

Abstract

Young patients with severe glenohumeral arthritis pose a challenging management problem for shoulder surgeons. Two controversial treatment options are total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and hemiarthroplasty. This study aims to characterize costs, as expressed by reimbursements for episodes of acute care, and outcomes associated with each treatment. We asked: for patients 30 to 50 years old with severe end-stage glenohumeral arthritis refractory to conservative management, (1) are more years of patient-derived satisfactory outcome by the Neer criteria and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) achieved using a TSA or a hemiarthroplasty; (2) does a TSA or a hemiarthroplasty result in a greater number of revision procedures; and (3) does a TSA or a hemiarthroplasty result in greater associated costs to society? The incidence of glenohumeral arthritis among 30- to 50-year-old patients, outcomes, reoperation probabilities, and associated costs from TSA and hemiarthroplasty were derived from the literature. A Markov chain decision tree model was developed from these estimates with number of revisions, cost of management for patients to 70 years old as defined by reimbursement for acute-care episodes, years with "satisfactory" or "excellent" outcome by the modified Neer criteria, and QALYs gained as principle outcome measures. A Monte Carlo simulation was conducted with a cohort representing the at-risk population for shoulder arthritis between 30 and 50 years old in the United States. During the lifetime of a cohort of 5279 patients, hemiarthroplasty as the initial treatment resulted in 59,574 patient years of satisfactory or excellent results (11.29 per patient) and average QALYs gained of 6.55, whereas TSA as the initial treatment resulted in 85,969 patient years of satisfactory or excellent results (16.29 per patient) and average QALYs gained of 7.96. During the lifetime of a cohort of 5279 patients, a hemiarthroplasty as the initial treatment led to 2090 lifetime revisions (0.4 per patient), whereas a TSA as the initial treatment led to 1605 lifetime revisions (0.3 per patient). During the lifetime of a cohort of 5279 patients, a hemiarthroplasty as initial treatment resulted in USD 132,500,000 associated direct reimbursements (USD 25,000 per patient), whereas a TSA as initial treatment resulted in USD 125,500,000 associated direct reimbursements (USD 23,700 per patient). Treatment of end-stage glenohumeral arthritis refractory to conservative treatment in patients 30 to 50 years old in the United States with TSA, instead of hemiarthroplasty, would result in greater cost savings, avoid a substantial number of revision procedures, and result in greater years of satisfactory or excellent patient outcomes and greater QALYs gained. On a population level, TSA is the cost-effective treatment for glenohumeral arthritis in patients 30 to 50 years old. Level II, economic and decision analysis study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 5 7%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 22 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Engineering 3 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 30 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2018.
All research outputs
#14,254,992
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#4,308
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,401
of 379,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#47
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 379,924 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.