Cost-effectiveness of nonpharmacologic, nonsurgical interventions for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis: systematic review

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatments for Musculoskeletal Conditions Offered by Physiotherapists: A Systematic Review of Trial-Based Evaluations

BACKGROUND

Musculoskeletal conditions are a leading contributor to disability worldwide. The treatment of these conditions accounts for 7% of health care costs in Germany and is often provided by physiotherapists. Yet, an overview of the cost-effectiveness of treatments for musculoskeletal conditions offered by physiotherapists is missing. This review aims to provide an overview of full economic evaluations of interventions for musculoskeletal conditions offered by physiotherapists.

METHODS

We systematically searched for publications in Medline, EconLit, and NHS-EED. Title and abstracts, followed by full texts were screened independently by two authors. We included trial-based full economic evaluations of physiotherapeutic interventions for patients with musculoskeletal conditions and allowed any control group. We extracted participants' information, the setting, the intervention, and details on the economic analyses. We evaluated the quality of the included articles with the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist.

RESULTS

We identified 5141 eligible publications and included 83 articles. The articles were based on 78 clinical trials. They addressed conditions of the spine (n = 39), the upper limb (n = 8), the lower limb (n = 30), and some other conditions (n = 6). The most investigated conditions were low back pain (n = 25) and knee and hip osteoarthritis (n = 16). The articles involved 69 comparisons between physiotherapeutic interventions (in which we defined primary interventions) and 81 comparisons in which only one intervention was offered by a physiotherapist. Physiotherapeutic interventions compared to those provided by other health professionals were cheaper and more effective in 43% (18/42) of the comparisons. Ten percent (4/42) of the interventions were dominated. The overall quality of the articles was high. However, the description of delivered interventions varied widely and often lacked details. This limited fair treatment comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality evidence was found for physiotherapeutic interventions to be cost-effective, but the result depends on the patient group, intervention, and control arm. Treatments of knee and back conditions were primarily investigated, highlighting a need for physiotherapeutic cost-effectiveness analyses of less often investigated joints and conditions. The documentation of provided interventions needs improvement to enable clinicians and stakeholders to fairly compare interventions and ultimately adopt cost-effective treatments.

CycLing and EducATion (CLEAT): protocol for a single centre randomised controlled trial of a cycling and education intervention versus standard physiotherapy care for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative joint disorder for which there is no known cure. Non-surgical management for people with mild-to-moderate hip OA focuses mainly on alleviating pain and maximising function via the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended combination of education and advice, exercise, and, where appropriate, weight loss. The CHAIN (Cycling against Hip pAIN) intervention is a group cycling and education intervention conceived as a way of implementing the NICE guidance.

METHODS

CycLing and EducATion (CLEAT) is a pragmatic, two parallel arm, randomised controlled trial comparing CHAIN with standard physiotherapy care for the treatment of mild-to-moderate hip OA. We will recruit 256 participants referred to the local NHS physiotherapy department over a 24-month recruitment period. Participants diagnosed with hip OA according to NICE guidance and meeting the criteria for GP exercise referral will be eligible to participate. Primary outcome is the difference in Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) function, daily living subscale between those receiving CHAIN and standard physiotherapy care. Secondary outcomes include performance-based functional measures (40 m walking, 30s chair stand and stair climb tests), ability for patient to self-care (patient activation measure) and self-reported health-related resource use including primary and secondary care contacts. The primary economic endpoint is the number of quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at 24 weeks follow-up. The study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research, Research for Patient Benefit PB-PG-0816-20033.

DISCUSSION

The literature identifies a lack of high-quality trials which inform on the content and design of education and exercise in the treatment of patients with hip OA and explore cost-effectiveness. CLEAT is a pragmatic trial which seeks to build further evidence of the clinical benefits of the CHAIN intervention compared to standard physiotherapy care within a randomised, controlled trial setting, and examine its cost-effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN19778222. Protocol v4.1, 24th October 2022.

Targeted exercises can improve biomechanical markers in individuals with knee osteoarthritis: A secondary analysis from a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

It is not clear whether exercise therapy significantly improves knee biomechanics during gait in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. This study aimed to determine whether targeted exercises based on a knee kinesiography exam improve biomechanical markers (BMs) compared with conventional primary care (CPC) management.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial in which patients were assigned to one of three groups: (1) Control (CPC), (2) Exercise, and (3) Exercise&Education. Fourteen known BMs in knee OA patients were assessed. The primary outcome was the global evolution ratio (GER), which was calculated as the sum of improved BMs over the sum of deteriorated BMs 6 months after baseline assessment. GER scores were categorized with three different sets of cut-off values into clinical levels: (a) Deteriorated, (b) Stabilized, and (c) Improved. Ordinal logistic regressions were performed on the per-protocol population to determine whether there was a relationship between group assignment and GER levels.

RESULTS

Of the 221 eligible participants, 163 were included. Two different regression models showed that patients from Group 3 (Exercise&Education) were 2.5-times more likely to be in an upper GER level (i.e., Stabilized or Improved) than patients from the control group (both odds ratio (OR) > 2.46, Wald Χ²(1) ≥ 7.268, P ≤ 0.01). They also reported significantly more improvement in pain and function (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, both P ≤ 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that targeted exercises can improve biomechanical markers in knee OA patients compared with CPC treatment. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and refine the biomechanical markers to address to maximize patients' clinical outcomes.

Balneotherapy and Health-related Quality of Life in Adults with Knee Osteoarthritis: a Prospective Observational Study Into a Real Clinical Practice Condition

Aim: To analyze the influence of balneotherapy applied in conditions of real clinical practice in Fitero’s Thermal Station (Spain) on HRQoL in adults with KOA. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective observational study conducted under conditions of real clinical practice with a 9-month follow-up. The individuals were beneficiaries of the Spanish social thermalism programme. A total of 10 sessions were prescribed, individually, considering the clinical situation and preferences of each participant. In all cases, 10 bath sessions were administered, along with other techniques. The clinical assessments were conducted before initiating the balneotherapy and 1, 3, 6 and 9 months after. The main variable was HRQoL (Euroqol 5D-5L; WOMAC). The statistical analysis was performed by intention to treat. Results: The study included 71 users. At 6 months, improvements were found in the following dimensions of the WOMAC questionnaire: pain (24.47%), stiffness (30.75%) and functional capacity (26.66%) (p<0.05). Pain and anxiety/depression showed statistically significant differences in the EQ 5D-5L throughout the study. Conclusions: HRQoL in KOA would improve with the Balneotherapy, prevailing the effects for up to 6 months. The absence of adverse effects and the ease of completing the treatment provided by the Spanish social thermalism system make this treatment feasible.

Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacological Management for Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a highly prevalent, disabling disease requiring chronic management that is associated with an enormous individual and societal burden. This systematic review provides a global cost-effectiveness evaluation of pharmacological therapy for the management of OA.

METHODS

Following Center for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidance, a literature search strategy was undertaken using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, and National Health Service Economic Evaluation database (NHS EED) to identify original articles containing cost-effectiveness evaluation of OA pharmacological treatment published before 4 November 2021. Risk of bias was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for economic evaluations. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used to assess the reporting quality of included articles.

RESULTS

Database searches identified 43 cost-effectiveness analysis studies (CEAs) on pharmacological management of OA that were conducted in 18 countries and four continents, with one study containing multiple continents. A total of four classes of drugs were assessed, including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioid analgesics, symptomatic slow-acting drugs for osteoarthritis (SYSADOAs), and intra-articular (IA) injections. The methodological approaches of these studies showed substantial heterogeneity. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) were (in 2021 US dollars) US$44.40 to US$307,013.56 for NSAIDS, US$11,984.84 to US$128,028.74 for opioids, US$10,930.17 to US$27,799.73 for SYSADOAs, and US$258.36 to US$58,447.97 for IA injections in different continents. The key drivers of cost effectiveness included medical resources, productivity, relative risks, and selected comparators.

CONCLUSION

This review showed substantial heterogeneity among studies, ranging from a finding of dominance to very high ICERs, but most studies found interventions to be cost effective based on specific ICER thresholds. Important challenges in the analysis were related to the standardization and methodological quality of studies, as well as the presentation of results.

Cost and Quality of Life Outcomes of the STepped Exercise Program for Patients With Knee OsteoArthritis Trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the randomized clinical trial STEP-KOA (STepped Exercise Program for patients with Knee OsteoArthritis).

METHODS

The trial included 230 intervention and 115 control participants from 2 Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers. A decision tree simulated outcomes for cohorts of patients receiving arthritis education (control) or STEP-KOA (intervention), which consisted of an internet-based exercise training program (step 1), phone counseling (step 2), and physical therapy (step 3) according to patient's response. Intervention costs were assessed from the VA perspective. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using 5-level EQ-5D US utility weights. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the difference in costs divided by the difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between arms at 9 months. A Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to generate a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.

RESULTS

The adjusted model found differential improvement in QOL utility weights of 0.042 (95% confidence interval 0.003-0.080; P=.03) for STEP-KOA versus control at 9 months. In the base case, STEP-KOA resulted in an incremental gain of 0.028 QALYs and an incremental cost of $279 per patient for an ICER of $10 076. One-way sensitivity analyses found the largest sources of variation in the ICER were the impact on QOL and the need for a VA-owned tablet. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis found a 98% probability of cost-effectiveness at $50 000 willingness-to-pay per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

STEP-KOA improves QOL and has a high probability of cost-effectiveness. Resources needed to implement the program will decline as ownership of mobile health devices increases.

Appropriateness of hip osteoarthritis management in clinical practice compared with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) criteria

Purpose

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) developed the appropriate use criteria (AUC) for the management of hip osteoarthritis (OA) to guide surgeons in making decisions based on the best available evidence. This study aimed to assess the applicability of the AUC by comparing the actual treatment provided at our institution with the AUC recommendations.

Methods

A retrospective review of 115 patients who were diagnosed and treated for hip OA at our institution between December 2017 and December 2019 was performed. Data were collected and entered into the AUC application to determine the rate of appropriateness of the provided treatment according to the AUC recommendations. Then, the actual provided treatments were compared with the AUC recommendations to determine the agreement between the two.

Results

There were 115 patients, with a mean age of 50.08 years (range, 30–80 years). The most frequent patient characteristics were middle age (40–65 years) with function-limiting pain at moderate to long distances, minimal hip OA on X-ray examination, mild range of motion limitation, and presence of modifiable risk factors for negative outcomes. The overall rate of appropriateness and in agreement with the AUC recommendations was 100% for conservative treatments and 80.1% for surgical treatments.

Conclusions

This study shows that the majority of the hip OA treatments provided at our institution were appropriate and in agreement with the AUC recommendations. Furthermore, the AUC can be easily accessed through a free web application using a computer or smartphone to obtain the recommended treatment for any patient with hip OA.

Interpretation of trial-based economic evaluations of musculoskeletal physical therapy interventions

BACKGROUND

As resources for healthcare are scarce, decision-makers increasingly rely on economic evaluations when making reimbursement decisions about new health technologies, such as drugs, procedures, devices, and equipment. Economic evaluations compare the costs and effects of two or more interventions. Musculoskeletal disorders have a high prevalence and result in high levels of disability and high costs worldwide. Because physical therapy interventions are usually the first line of treatment for musculoskeletal disorders, economic evaluations of such interventions are becoming increasingly important for stakeholders in the field of physical therapy, including physical therapists, decision-makers, and reseachers. However, economic evaluations are relatively difficult to interpret for the majority of stakeholders.

OBJECTIVE

To support physical therapists, decision-makers, and researchers in the field of physical therapy interpreting trial-based economic evaluations and translating the results of such studies to clinical practice.

METHODS

The design, analysis, and interpretation of economic evaluations performed alongside randomized controlled trials are discussed. To further illustrate and explain these concepts, we use a case study assessing the cost-effectiveness of exercise therapy compared to standard advice in patients with musculoskeletal disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations are increasingly being used in healthcare decision-making. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that their design, conduct, and analysis are state-of-the-art and that their interpretation is adequate. This masterclass will help physical therapists, decision-makers, and researchers in the field of physical therapy to critically appraise the quality and results of trial-based economic evaluations and to apply the results of such studies to their own clinical practice and setting.

Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasties Are Highly Cost-Effective Procedures: The Importance of Duration of Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA) are clinically effective but high cost procedures. The aim of this study is to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of THA and TKA in the New Zealand (NZ) healthcare system.

METHODS

Data were collected from 713 patients undergoing THA and 520 patients undergoing TKA at our local public hospital. SF-6D utility values were obtained from participants preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively, and deaths and any revision surgeries from patient records and the New Zealand Joint Registry at minimum 8-year follow-up. A continuous-time state-transition simulation model was used to estimate costs and health gains to 15 years. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), treatment costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to determine cost effectiveness. ICERs below NZ gross domestic product (GDP; NZ$60 600) and 0.5 times GDP per capita were considered "cost effective" and "highly cost effective" respectively.

RESULTS

Cumulative health gains were 2.8 QALYs (THA) and 2.3 QALYs (TKA) over 15 years. Cost effectiveness improved from ICERs of NZ$74,400 (THA) and NZ$93,000 (TKA) at 1 year to NZ$6000 (THA) and NZ$7500 (TKA) at 15 years. THA and TKA were cost effective after 2 years and highly cost effective after 3 years. QALY gains and cost effectiveness were greater in patients with worse preoperative functional status and younger age.

CONCLUSION

THA and TKA are highly cost-effective procedures over longer term horizons. Although preoperative status and age were associated with cost effectiveness, both THA and TKA remained cost effective in patients with less severe preoperative scores and older ages.

Are education, exercise and diet interventions a cost-effective treatment to manage hip and knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify research gaps and inform implementation we systematically reviewed the literature evaluating cost-effectiveness of recommended treatments (education, exercise and diet) for the management of hip and/or knee OA.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database, and EconLit from inception to November 2019 for trial-based economic evaluations investigating hip and/or knee OA core treatments. Two investigators screened relevant publications, extracted data and synthesized results. Risk of bias was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list.

RESULTS

Two cost-minimization, five cost-effectiveness and 16 cost-utility analyses evaluated core treatments in six health systems. Exercise therapy with and without education or diet was cost-effective or cost-saving compared to education or physician-delivered usual care at conventional willingness to pay (WTP) thresholds in 15 out of 16 publications. Exercise interventions were cost-effective compared to physiotherapist-delivered usual care in three studies at conventional WTP thresholds. Education interventions were not cost-effective compared to usual care or placebo at conventional WTP thresholds in three out of four publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Structured core treatment programs were clinically effective and cost-effective, compared to physician-delivered usual care, in five health care systems. Providing education about core treatments was not consistently cost-effective. Implementing structured core treatment programs into funded clinical pathways would likely be an efficient use of health system resources and enhance physician-delivered usual primary care.

Economic evaluation of the dr. Bart app in people with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis

Objective

To evaluate the cost‐utility and cost‐effectiveness of the dr. Bart app compared to usual care in people with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knees and hips, applying a health care payer perspective.

Methods

This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 6‐month randomized controlled trial that included 427 participants. The dr. Bart app is a stand‐alone eHealth application that invites users to select pre‐formulated goals (i.e., “tiny habits”) and triggers for a healthier lifestyle. Self‐reported outcome measures were health care costs, quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) according to the EuroQol 5‐dimension 3‐level (EQ‐5D‐3L) descriptive system, the EuroQol visual analog scale (QALY VAS), patient activation measure 13 (PAM‐13), and 5 subscales of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score/Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Missing data were multiply imputed, and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.

Results

The mean ± SD age of the study participants was 62.1 ± 7.3 years, and the majority of participants were female (72%). Health care costs were lower in the intervention group compared to the group who received usual care (€−22 [95% confidence interval €−36, −3]). For QALY and QALY VAS, the probability of the dr. Bart app being cost‐effective compared to usual care was 0.71 and 0.67, respectively, at a willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) of €10,000 and 0.64 and 0.56, respectively, at a WTP of €80.000. For self‐management behavior, symptoms, pain, and activities of daily living, the probability that the dr. Bart app was cost‐effective was >0.82, and the probability that the dr. Bart app was cost‐effective in the areas of activities and quality of life was <0.40, regardless of WTP thresholds.

Conclusion

This economic evaluation showed that costs were lower for the dr. Bart app group compared to the group who received usual care. Given the noninvasive nature of the intervention and the moderate probability of it being cost‐effective for the majority of outcomes, the dr. Bart app has the potential to serve as a tool to provide education and goal setting in OA and its treatment options.

Sustained acoustic medicine as a non-surgical and non-opioid knee osteoarthritis treatment option: a health economic cost-effectiveness analysis for symptom management

Background

Patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis (OA) and presenting with symptoms are seeking conservative treatment options to reduce pain, improve function, and avoid surgery. Sustained acoustic medicine (SAM), a multi-hour treatment has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes for patients with knee OA. The purpose of this analysis was to compare the costs and effectiveness of multi-hour SAM treatment versus the standard of care (SOC) over a 6-month timeframe for OA symptom management.

Methods

A decision tree analysis was used to compare the costs and effectiveness of SAM treatment versus SOC in patients with OA. Probabilities of success for OA treatment and effectiveness were derived from the literature using systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Costs were derived from Medicare payment rates and manufacturer prices. Functional effectiveness was measured as the effect size of a therapy and treatment pathways compared to a SOC treatment pathway. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine which cost variables had the greatest effect on deciding which option was the least costly. An incremental cost-effectiveness plot comparing SAM treatment vs. SOC was also generated using 1000 iterations of the model. Lastly, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the (cost of SAM minus cost of SOC) divided by (functional effectiveness of SAM minus functional effectiveness of SOC).

Results

Base case demonstrated that over 6 months, the cost and functional effectiveness of SAM was $8641 and 0.52 versus SOC at: $6281 and 0.39, respectively. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that in order for SAM to be the less expensive option, the cost per 15-min session of PT would need to be greater than $88, or SAM would need to be priced at less than or equal to $2276. Incremental cost-effectiveness demonstrated that most of the time (84%) SAM treatment resulted in improved functional effectiveness but at a higher cost than SOC.

Conclusion

In patients with osteoarthritis, SAM treatment demonstrated improved pain and functional gains compared to SOC but at an increased cost. Based on the SAM treatment ICER score being ≤ $50,000, it appears that SAM is a cost-effective treatment for knee OA.

Systematic review of economic evaluations investigating education, exercise, and dietary weight management to manage hip and knee osteoarthritis: protocol

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend education, exercise, and dietary weight management as core treatments to manage osteoarthritis (OA) regardless of disease severity or co-morbidity. Evidence supports the clinical effectiveness of OA management programs, but the cost-effectiveness of core treatments remains unclear. We will systematically review, synthesize, and assess the literature in economic evaluations of core treatments (education, exercise, and dietary weight management) for the management of hip and/or knee OA.

METHODS

We will search the following elecftronic databases (from inception onwards): MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database, and EconLit. Economic evaluations alongside randomized or nonrandomized clinical trials investigating OA education, exercise, and dietary weight management interventions will be included. Title, abstract, and full text of relevant publications will be screened independently by two reviewers. A content matter expert will resolve any conflicts between two reviewers. Key information from relevant papers will be extracted and tabulated to provide an overview of the published literature. Methodological quality will be evaluated using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list. A narrative synthesis without meta-analysis will be conducted. Subgroup analysis will attempt to find trends between research methods, intervention characteristics, and results.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this review will evaluate the breadth and quality of economic evaluations conducted alongside clinical trials for core treatments in OA management.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020155964.

Systematic Review of the Evolution of Health-Economic Evaluation Models of Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To comprehensively synthesize the evolution of health-economic evaluation models (HEEMs) of all osteoarthritis (OA) interventions, including preventions, core treatments, adjunct nonpharmacologic interventions, pharmacologic interventions, and surgical treatments.

METHODS

The literature was searched within health-economic/biomedical databases. Data extracted included OA type, population characteristics, model setting/type/events, study perspective, and comparators; the reporting quality of the studies was also assessed. The review protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018092937).

RESULTS

Eighty-eight studies were included. Pharmacologic and surgical interventions were the focus in 51% and 44% of studies, respectively. Twenty-four studies adopted a societal perspective (with increasing popularity after 2013), but most (63%) did not include indirect costs. Quality-adjusted life years was the most popular outcome measure since 2008. Markov models were used by 62% of studies, with increasing popularity since 2008. Until 2010, most studies used short-to-medium time horizons; subsequently, a lifetime horizon became popular. A total of 86% of studies reported discount rates (predominantly between 3% and 5%). Studies published after 2002 had a better coverage of OA-related adverse events (AEs). Reporting quality significantly improved after 2001.

CONCLUSION

OA HEEMs have evolved and improved substantially over time, with the focus shifting from short-to-medium-term pharmacologic decision-tree models to surgical-focused lifetime Markov models. Indirect costs of OA are frequently not considered, despite using a societal perspective. There was a lack of reporting sensitivity of model outcome to input parameters, including discount rate, OA definition, and population parameters. While the coverage of OA-related AEs has improved over time, it is still not comprehensive.

Cost-effectiveness of 12 weeks of supervised treatment compared to written advice in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a secondary analysis of the 2-year outcome from a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the 24-month cost-effectiveness of supervised treatment compared to written advice in knee osteoarthritis (OA).

DESIGN

100 adults with moderate-severe OA not eligible for total knee replacement (TKR) randomized to a 12-week individualized, supervised treatment (exercise, education, diet, insoles and pain medication) or written advice. Effectiveness was measured as change in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from baseline to 24 months, including data from baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months, while healthcare costs and transfer payments were derived from national registries after final follow-up. Incremental costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. A sensitivity analysis resampling existing data was conducted and the probability of cost-effectiveness was estimated using a 22,665 Euros/QALY threshold. In a sensitivity analysis, cost-effectiveness was calculated for different costs of the supervised treatment (actual cost in study; cost in private practice; and in-between cost).

RESULTS

Average costs were similar between groups (6,758 Euros vs 6,880 Euros), while the supervised treatment were close to being more effective (incremental effect (95% CI) of 0.075 (-0.005 to 0.156). In the primary analysis excluding deaths, this led the supervised treatment to be cost-effective, compared to written advice. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the results were sensitive to changes in the cost of treatment, but in all scenarios the supervised treatment was cost-effective (ICERs of 6,229 to 20,688 Euros/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

From a 24-month perspective, a 12-week individualized, supervised treatment program is cost-effective compared to written advice in patients with moderate-severe knee OA not eligible for TKR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01535001.

Outcomes of a conservative care program for knee osteoarthritis through translation of research into practice

INTRODUCTION

Evidence-based guidelines suggest a conservative, nonsurgical approach as first-line treatment for knee osteoarthritis. However, previous literature has documented underutilization of the fundamental components of condition management emphasized in the guidelines. The intervention aim is to apply organized conservative components of care for knee osteoarthritis in an evidence-based management program through the translation of research into practice with a target to observe meaningful functional improvement in a distinct population.

METHODS

The program, modeled after the nonsurgical arm of a randomized, controlled trial, was designed as a single-arm observational cohort study with a pre- and post-program comparison for participants reporting presence of knee osteoarthritis who were attributed to a specific employer's health plan in the United States. The 12-week intervention consisted of condition education, group exercise, and a dietary intervention.

RESULTS

Ninety-six participants enrolled in the program, of which 72% completed the protocol. The median change in pre- to post-program Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score values was 10.4 ± 0.8 (Z = 210.5, p < 0.001)-a clinically important change. Secondary outcomes were complementary to the primary outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of the program indicate that the clinically significant 3-month findings in the report by Skou et al. (2015) regarding functional improvement can be replicated in an alternate setting. Organizing and offering fundamental components of condition management in a group format with provider oversight could be a feasible and logical component in the continuum of care for knee osteoarthritis, while complementing other secondary management strategies following diagnosis.

Cost-Effectiveness of Diet and Exercise for Overweight and Obese Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

The Intensive Diet and Exercise for Arthritis (IDEA) trial showed that an intensive diet and exercise (D+E) program led to a mean 10.6-kg weight reduction and 51% pain reduction in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of the current study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of adding this D+E program to treatment in overweight and obese (body mass index >27 kg/m² ) patients with knee OA.

METHODS

We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model to estimate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime costs for overweight and obese patients with knee OA, with and without the D+E program. We evaluated cost-effectiveness with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a ratio of the differences in lifetime cost and QALYs between treatment strategies. We considered 3 cost-effectiveness thresholds: $50,000/QALY, $100,000/QALY, and $200,000/QALY. Analyses were conducted from health care sector and societal perspectives and used a lifetime horizon. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% per year. D+E characteristics were derived from the IDEA trial. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) were used to evaluate parameter uncertainty and the effect of extending the duration of the D+E program.

RESULTS

In the base case, D+E led to 0.054 QALYs gained per person and cost $1,845 from the health care sector perspective and $1,624 from the societal perspective. This resulted in ICERs of $34,100/QALY and $30,000/QALY. In the health care sector perspective PSA, D+E had 58% and 100% likelihoods of being cost-effective with thresholds of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Adding D+E to usual care for overweight and obese patients with knee OA is cost-effective and should be implemented in clinical practice.

EQ-5D-5L utilities per health states in Spanish population with knee or hip osteoarthritis

Background

The objective of this study was to obtain utilities by means of EQ-5D-5L for different health states in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) or hip osteoarthritis (HOA) in Spain, and to compare these values with those used in foreign studies with the aim of discussing their transferability for their use in economic evaluations conducted in Spain.

Methods

Primary study: Observational prospective study of KOA or HOA patients in Spain. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected to characterize the sample. Utilities were elicited using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. ANOVA and bivariable analyses were conducted to identify differences between health states. Literature review: Using the bibliographic databases NSH EED and CEA Registry, we conducted searches of model-based cost utilities analyses of technologies in KOA or HOA patients. Health states and utilities were extracted and compared with values obtained from the Spanish sample.

Results

Three hundred ninety-seven subjects with KOA and 361 subjects with HOA were included, with average utilities of 0.544 and 0.520, respectively. In both samples, differences were found in utilities according to level of pain, stiffness and physical function (WOMAC) and severity of symptoms (Oxford scales), so that the worst the symptoms, the lower the utilities. The utilities after surgery were higher than before surgery. Due to limitations from our study related to sample size and observational design, it was not possible to estimate utilities for approximately half the health states included in the published models because they were directly related to specific technologies. For almost 100% of health states of the selected studies we obtained very different utilities from those reported in the literature.

Conclusions

To our knowledge this is the first article with detailed utilities estimated using the EQ-5D-5L in Spain for KOA and HOA patients. In both populations, utilities are lower for worse health states in terms of level of pain, stiffness and physical function according to WOMAC, and according to the Oxford scales. Most utilities obtained from the Spanish sample are lower than those reported in the international literature. Further studies estimating utilities from local populations are required to avoid the use of foreign sources in economic evaluations.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of conservative treatments for chronic lower extremity musculoskeletal complaints

Objective

The aim was to appraise and synthesize studies evaluating the clinical and cost effectiveness of conservative interventions for chronic lower extremity musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions and describe their characteristics, including the type of economic evaluation, primary outcomes and which conditions.

Methods

The search strategy related to economic evaluations of lower limb MSK conditions that used conservative therapies. Eight electronic databases were searched (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, NHSEED and Proquest), as were the reference lists from included articles. The quality of articles was appraised using a modified version of the economic evaluations’ reporting checklist (economic) and The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias (clinical).

Results

Twenty-six studies were eligible and included in the review. Economic evaluations of conservative interventions for OA or pain affecting the knee/hip (n = 25; 93%) were most common. The main approaches adopted were cost–utility analysis (n = 17; 68%) or cost–effectiveness analysis (n = 5; 19%). Two studies involved interventions including footwear/foot orthoses; for heel pain (n = 1; 4%) and overuse injuries (n = 1; 4%). Fifty per cent of economic evaluations adopted the EQ-5D-3L as the primary outcome measure for quality of life and quality-adjusted life year calculations.

Conclusion

Economic evaluations have been conducted largely for exercise-based interventions for MSK conditions of the hip and knee. Few economic evaluations have been conducted for other clinically important lower limb MSK conditions. A matrix presentation of costs mapped with outcomes indicated increasing costs with either no difference or improvements in clinical effectiveness. The majority of economic evaluations were of good reporting quality, as were the accompanying clinical studies.

Implementation of a 'Joint Clinic' to resolve unmet need for orthopaedic services in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis: a program evaluation

Background

Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis, principally affecting the older population. Highly prevalent, disabling diseases such as osteoarthritis strain the capacity of health systems, and can result in unmet need for services. The Joint Clinic was initiated to provide secondary care consultations and access to outpatient services for people with advanced hip or knee osteoarthritis, who were referred by their general practitioner for orthopaedic consultation but not offered an orthopaedic specialist appointment.

Methods

This longitudinal programme evaluation comprised four components: a proof-of-concept evaluation; an implementation evaluation; a process evaluation; and an outcomes evaluation. Interviews and surveys of general practitioners, staff, and patients were conducted pre- and post-implementation. Interviews were transcribed, and thematic analysis was completed. In addition, Joint Clinic patient visits and outcomes were reviewed.

Results

One hundred and eleven primary care physicians (GPs) and 66 patients were surveyed, and 28 semi-structured interviews of hospital staff and GPs were conducted. Proof of concept was satisfied. Interim and final implementation evaluations indicated adherence to the concept model, high levels of acceptance of and confidence in the programme and its staff, and timely completion within budget. Process evaluation revealed positive impacts of the programme and positive stakeholder perceptions, with some weaknesses in communication to the outer context of primary care. The Joint Clinic saw a total of 637 patient visits during 2 years of operation. Unmet need was reduced by 90%. Patient and referring physician satisfaction was high. Hospital management confirmed that the programme will continue.

Conclusions

This evaluation indicates that the Joint Clinic concept model is fit for purpose, functioned well within the organisation, and achieved its primary objective of reducing unmet need of secondary care consultation for those suffering advanced hip or knee osteoarthritis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2702-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Process evaluation of complex interventions tested in randomised controlled trials in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of complex interventions for the management of musculoskeletal disorders has been estimated in many randomised clinical trials (RCTs). These trials inform which interventions are the most effective, however they do not always inform how an intervention achieved its clinical outcomes, nor how and what elements of an intervention were delivered to patients. Such information is useful for translating findings into clinical practice. A few process evaluation studies have been conducted alongside RCTs and a variety of methods have been used. To gain a better understanding of current practices of process evaluation in RCTs in musculoskeletal disorders, this systematic review is designed to answer the following research question: How are process evaluation of complex interventions tested in RCTs in musculoskeletal disorders being conducted?

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will systematically search seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane database) from the date of inception to August 2018 for studies on process evaluation of RCTs on non-surgical and non-pharmacological management of musculoskeletal disorders. We will include qualitative and quantitative studies conducted alongside RCTs, reported with the RCTs or separate studies that assessed interventions for musculoskeletal disorders. Two reviewers will screen abstracts and apply prespecified inclusion criteria to identify relevant studies, extract the data and assess the risk of bias within included studies. We will follow recommendations from the 'Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Guidance Series' when assessing methodological strengths and limitations of included studies. We will use a narrative synthesis to describe findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as this review will not collect original data. Findings from this systematic review will be presented at a scientific conference and published in a peer reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018109600.

Incremental clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of providing supervised physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: 2-year results of the MOA randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness at 2-year follow-up of providing individual, supervised exercise physiotherapy and/or manual physiotherapy in addition to usual medical care.

METHOD

People with hip or knee osteoarthritis meeting the American College of Rheumatology clinical diagnostic criteria were randomised (1:1, concealed, assessor-blinded) to four groups: usual medical care; supervised exercise physiotherapy; manual physiotherapy; or combined exercise and manual physiotherapy. Physiotherapy group participants were provided 10 50-min treatment sessions including booster sessions at 4 and 13 months, in addition to usual care. The primary outcome at 2-year follow-up was incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of each physiotherapy intervention in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, from the health system and societal perspectives. To allow interpretation of negative ICURs, we report incremental net benefit (INB). The primary clinical outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

RESULTS

Of 206 patients, 186 (90·3%) were retained at 2-year follow-up. Exercise physiotherapy and manual physiotherapy dominated usual care, demonstrating cost savings; combined therapy did not. Exercise therapy had the highest incremental net benefits (INBs), statistically significant at all willingness-to-pay (base-case: societal New Zealand (NZ)$6,312, 95%CI 334 to 12,279; health system NZ$8,065, 95%CI 136 to 15,994). Clinical improvements were superior to usual care only in the exercise physiotherapy group (-28.2 WOMAC points, 95%CI -49.2 to -7.1). No serious adverse events were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Individually supervised exercise therapy is cost-effective and clinically effective in addition to usual medical care at 2-year follow-up, and leads to cost savings for the health system and society.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered with the Australian NZ Clinical Trials Registry, reference ACTRN12608000130369.

Cost-utility analysis of interventions to improve effectiveness of exercise therapy for adults with knee osteoarthritis: the BEEP trial

Objectives

Evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of enhancing physical therapy exercise programmes in order to improve outcomes for patients with knee OA remains unclear. This study investigates the cost-effectiveness of two enhanced physical therapy interventions compared with usual physical therapy care (UC) for adults with knee OA.

Methods

A trial-based cost–utility analysis of individually tailored exercise (ITE) or targeted exercise adherence (TEA) compared with UC was undertaken over a period of 18 months. Patient-level costs were obtained, and effectiveness was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), allowing the calculation of cost per QALY gained from a base-case UK health-care perspective.

Results

The UC group was associated with lower National Health Service (NHS) costs [ITE-UC: £273.30, 95% CI: £−62.10 to £562.60; TEA-UC: £141.80, 95% CI: £−135.60 to £408.10)] and slightly higher QALY gains (ITE-UC: −0.015, 95% CI: −0.057 to 0.026; TEA-UC: −0.003, 95% CI: −0.045 to 0.038). In the base case, UC was the most likely cost-effective option (probability <40% of ITE or TEA cost-effective at £20 000/QALY). Differences in total costs were attributable to intervention costs, number of visits to NHS consultants and knee surgery, which were higher in both ITE and TEA groups.

Conclusion

This is the first economic evaluation comparing usual physical therapy care vs enhanced exercise interventions for knee OA that involves greater exercise individualization, supervision and progression or that focuses on exercise and physical activity adherence over the longer term. Our findings show that UC is likely to be the most cost-effective option.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 93634563.

Trial protocol

Full details of the trial protocol can be found in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/15/254 doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-254

Cost-effectiveness of the HiBalance training program for elderly with Parkinson's disease: analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the cost-effectiveness of the HiBalance training program for managing Parkinson's disease (PD)-related balance and gait disorders.

DESIGN:

Cost comparison design following the randomized controlled trial comparing a novel balance training intervention with care as usual.

SUBJECTS:

A total of 100 participants with mild-moderate PD were randomized to either the intervention ( n = 51) or the control group ( n = 49).

INTERVENTION:

A 10-week (three times per week), group-based, progressive balance training program, led by two physical therapists.

MAIN OUTCOMES:

All program costs were collected for both groups. Cost-utility was evaluated using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost-effectiveness measures were the Mini Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest; assessing balance performance) and gait velocity. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted.

RESULTS:

The between-group difference in QALYs was 0.043 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.011-0.075), favoring the intervention group. Between-group differences in balance performance and gait velocity were 2.16 points (95% CI: 1.19-3.13) and 8.2 cm/second (95% CI: 2.9-13.6), respectively, favoring the intervention group. The mean cost per participant in the intervention group was 16,222 SEK (€1649) compared to 2696 SEK (€274) for controls. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 314,558 SEK (€31,969) for an additional QALY, 6262 SEK (€631) for one point improvement in balance performance, and 1650 SEK (€166) for 1 cm/second increase in gait velocity. Sensitivity analyses indicated a high probability (85%) of program success.

CONCLUSION:

In terms of QALYs, the HiBalance program demonstrated a high probability of cost-effectiveness in the short-term perspective when considering the willingness-to-pay thresholds used in Europe.

Cost-effectiveness of a blended physiotherapy intervention compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis: a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background

Blended physiotherapy, in which physiotherapy sessions and an online application are integrated, might support patients in taking an active role in the management of their chronic condition and may reduce disease related costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a blended physiotherapy intervention (e-Exercise) compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with osteoarthritis of hip and/or knee, from the societal as well as the healthcare perspective.

Methods

This economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 12-month cluster randomized controlled trial, in which 108 patients received e-Exercise, consisting of physiotherapy sessions and a web-application, and 99 patients received usual physiotherapy. Clinical outcome measures were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) according to the EuroQol (EQ-5D-3 L), physical functioning (HOOS/KOOS) and physical activity (Actigraph Accelerometer). Costs were measured using self-reported questionnaires. Missing data were multiply imputed and bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty.

Results

Intervention costs and medication costs were significantly lower in e-Exercise compared to usual physiotherapy. Total societal costs and total healthcare costs did not significantly differ between groups. No significant differences in effectiveness were found between groups. For physical functioning and physical activity, the maximum probability of e-Exercise being cost-effective compared to usual physiotherapy was moderate (< 0.82) from both perspectives. For QALYs, the probability of e-Exercise being cost-effective compared to usual physiotherapy was 0.68/0.84 at a willingness to pay of 10,000 Euro and 0.70/0.80 at a willingness to pay of 80,000 Euro per gained QALY, from respectively the societal and the healthcare perspective.

Conclusions

E-Exercise itself was significantly cheaper compared to usual physiotherapy in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis, but not cost-effective from the societal- as well as healthcare perspective. The decision between both interventions can be based on the preferences of the patient and the physiotherapist.

Trial registration

NTR4224 (25 October 2013).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-018-5975-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Optimal primary care management of clinical osteoarthritis and joint pain in older people: a mixed-methods programme of systematic reviews, observational and qualitative studies, and randomised controlled trials

Background

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common long-term condition managed in UK general practice. However, care is suboptimal despite evidence that primary care and community-based interventions can reduce OA pain and disability.

Objectives

The overall aim was to improve primary care management of OA and the health of patients with OA. Four parallel linked workstreams aimed to (1) develop a health economic decision model for estimating the potential for cost-effective delivery of primary care OA interventions to improve population health, (2) develop and evaluate new health-care models for delivery of core treatments and support for self-management among primary care consulters with OA, and to investigate prioritisation and implementation of OA care among the public, patients, doctors, health-care professionals and NHS trusts, (3) determine the effectiveness of strategies to optimise specific components of core OA treatment using the example of exercise and (4) investigate the effect of interventions to tackle barriers to core OA treatment, using the example of comorbid anxiety and depression in persons with OA.

Data sources

The North Staffordshire Osteoarthritis Project database, held by Keele University, was the source of data for secondary analyses in workstream 1.

Methods

Workstream 1 used meta-analysis and synthesis of published evidence about effectiveness of primary care treatments, combined with secondary analysis of existing longitudinal population-based cohort data, to identify predictors of poor long-term outcome (prognostic factors) and design a health economic decision model to estimate cost-effectiveness of different hypothetical strategies for implementing optimal primary care for patients with OA. Workstream 2 used mixed methods to (1) develop and test a ‘model OA consultation’ for primary care health-care professionals (qualitative interviews, consensus, training and evaluation) and (2) evaluate the combined effect of a computerised ‘pop-up’ guideline for general practitioners (GPs) in the consultation and implementing the model OA consultation on practice and patient outcomes (parallel group intervention study). Workstream 3 developed and investigated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) how to optimise the effect of exercise in persons with knee OA by tailoring it to the individual and improving adherence. Workstream 4 developed and investigated in a cluster RCT the extent to which screening patients for comorbid anxiety and depression can improve OA outcomes. Public and patient involvement included proposal development, project steering and analysis. An OA forum involved public, patient, health professional, social care and researcher representatives to debate the results and formulate proposals for wider implementation and dissemination.

Results

This programme provides evidence (1) that economic modelling can be used in OA to extrapolate findings of cost-effectiveness beyond the short-term outcomes of clinical trials, (2) about ways of implementing support for self-management and models of optimal primary care informed by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations, including the beneficial effects of training in a model OA consultation on GP behaviour and of pop-up screens in GP consultations on the quality of prescribing, (3) against adding enhanced interventions to current effective physiotherapy-led exercise for knee OA and (4) against screening for anxiety and depression in patients with musculoskeletal pain as an addition to current best practice for OA.

Conclusions

Implementation of evidence-based care for patients with OA is feasible in general practice and has an immediate impact on improving the quality of care delivered to patients. However, improved levels of quality of care, changes to current best practice physiotherapy and successful introduction of psychological screening, as achieved by this programme, did not substantially reduce patients’ pain and disability. This poses important challenges for clinical practice and OA research.

Limitations

The key limitation in this work is the lack of improvement in patient-reported pain and disability despite clear evidence of enhanced delivery of evidence-based care.

Future work recommendations

(1) New thinking and research is needed into the achievable and desirable long-term goals of care for people with OA, (2) continuing investigation into the resources needed to properly implement clinical guidelines for management of OA as a long-term condition, such as regular monitoring to maintain exercise and physical activity and (3) new research to identify subgroups of patients with OA as a basis for stratified primary care including (i) those with good prognosis who can self-manage with minimal investigation or specialist treatment, (ii) those who will respond to, and benefit from, specific interventions in primary care, such as physiotherapy-led exercise, and (iii) develop research into effective identification and treatment of clinically important anxiety and depression in patients with OA and into the effects of pain management on psychological outcomes in patients with OA.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN06984617, ISRCTN93634563 and ISRCTN40721988.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research Programme and will be published in full inProgramme Grants for Applied Research Programme; Vol. 6, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Exercise, Manual Therapy, and Booster Sessions in Knee Osteoarthritis: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis From a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Limited information exists regarding the cost-effectiveness of rehabilitation strategies for individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to compare the cost-effectiveness of 4 different combinations of exercise, manual therapy, and booster sessions for individuals with knee OA.

DESIGN

This economic evaluation involved a cost-effectiveness analysis performed alongside a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The study took place in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Salt Lake City, Utah; and San Antonio, Texas.

PARTICIPANTS

The study participants were 300 individuals taking part in a randomized controlled trial investigating various physical therapy strategies for knee OA.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized into 4 treatment groups: exercise only (EX), exercise plus booster sessions (EX+B), exercise plus manual therapy (EX+MT), and exercise plus manual therapy and booster sessions (EX+MT+B).

MEASUREMENTS

For the 2-year base case scenario, a Markov model was constructed using the United States societal perspective and a 3% discount rate for costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated to compare differences in cost per QALY gained among the 4 treatment strategies.

RESULTS

In the 2-year analysis, booster strategies (EX+MT+B and EX+B) dominated no-booster strategies, with both lower health care costs and greater effectiveness. EX+MT+B had the lowest total health care costs. EX+B cost[Formula: see text]1061 more and gained 0.082 more QALYs than EX+MT+B, for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of[Formula: see text]12,900/QALY gained.

LIMITATIONS

The small number of total knee arthroplasty surgeries received by individuals in this study made the assessment of whether any particular strategy was more successful at delaying or preventing surgery in individuals with knee OA difficult.

CONCLUSIONS

Spacing exercise-based physical therapy sessions over 12 months using periodic booster sessions was less costly and more effective over 2 years than strategies not containing booster sessions for individuals with knee OA.

A Fresh Perspective on a Familiar Problem: Examining Disparities in Knee Osteoarthritis Using a Markov Model

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Disparities in the presentation of knee osteoarthritis (OA) and in the utilization of treatment across sex, racial, and ethnic groups in the United States are well documented.

Objectives:

We used a Markov model to calculate lifetime costs of knee OA treatment. We then used the model results to compute costs of disparities in treatment by race, ethnicity, sex, and socioeconomic status.

Research Design:

We used the literature to construct a Markov Model of knee OA and publicly available data to create the model parameters and patient populations of interest. An expert panel of physicians, who treated a large number of patients with knee OA, constructed treatment pathways. Direct costs were based on the literature and indirect costs were derived from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey.

Results:

We found that failing to obtain effective treatment increased costs and limited benefits for all groups. Delaying treatment imposed a greater cost across all groups and decreased benefits. Lost income because of lower labor market productivity comprised a substantial proportion of the lifetime costs of knee OA. Population simulations demonstrated that as the diversity of the US population increases, the societal costs of racial and ethnic disparities in treatment utilization for knee OA will increase.

Conclusions:

Our results show that disparities in treatment of knee OA are costly. All stakeholders involved in treatment decisions for knee OA patients should consider costs associated with delaying and forgoing treatment, especially for disadvantaged populations. Such decisions may lead to higher costs and worse health outcomes.

Systematic Review of Costs and Effects of Self-Management Interventions for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: Spotlight on Analytic Perspective and Outcomes Assessment

BACKGROUND

Evidence for the cost-effectiveness of self-management interventions for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) lacks consensus, which may be due to variability in the costing methods employed.

PURPOSE

The purposes of the study were to identify how costs and effects have been assessed in economic analysis of self-management interventions for CMP and to identify the effect of the chosen analytical perspective on cost-effectiveness conclusions.

DATA SOURCES

Five databases were searched for all study designs using relevant terms.

STUDY SELECTION

Two independent researchers reviewed all titles for predefined inclusion criteria: adults (≥18 years of age) with CMP, interventions with a primary aim of promoting self-management, and conducted a cost analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION

Descriptive data including population, self-management intervention, analytical perspective, and costs and effects measured were collected by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fifty-seven studies were identified: 65% (n = 37) chose the societal perspective, of which 89% (n = 33) captured health care utilization, 92% (n = 34) reported labor productivity, 65% (n = 24) included intervention delivery, and 59% (n = 22) captured patient/family costs. Types of costs varied in all studies. Eight studies conducted analyses from both health service and societal perspectives; cost-effectiveness estimates varied with perspective chosen, but in no case was the difference sufficient to change overall policy recommendations.

LIMITATIONS

Chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions where self-management is recommended, but not as a primary treatment, were excluded. Gray literature was excluded.

CONCLUSION

Substantial heterogeneity in the cost components captured in the assessment of self-management for CMP was found; this was independent of the analytic perspective used. Greater efforts to ensure complete and consistent costings are required if reliable cost-effectiveness evidence of self-management interventions is to be generated and to inform the most appropriate perspective for economic analyses in this field.

METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY OF ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS ALONGSIDE TRIALS OF KNEE PHYSIOTHERAPY

OBJECTIVES

The methodological quality of an economic evaluation performed alongside a clinical trial can be underestimated if the paper does not report key methodological features. This study discusses methodological assessment issues on the example of a systematic review on cost-effectiveness of physiotherapy for knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Six economic evaluation studies included in the systematic review and related clinical trials were assessed using the 10-question check-list by Drummond and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.

RESULTS

All economic evaluations were performed alongside a clinical trial but the studied interventions were too heterogeneous to be synthesized. Methodological quality of the economic evaluations reported in the papers was not free of drawbacks, and in some cases, it improved when information from the related clinical trial was taken into account.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluation papers dedicate little space to methodological features of related clinical trials; therefore, the methodological quality can be underestimated if evaluated separately from the trials. Future economic evaluations should follow more strictly the recommendations about methodology and the authors should pay special attention to the quality of reporting.

Association Between Sedentary Time and Quality of Life From the Osteoarthritis Initiative: Who Might Benefit Most From Treatment?

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship between sedentary behavior and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) among participants in the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

DESIGN

Longitudinal, observational design.

SETTING

Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals (N=1794) from a prospective, multicenter longitudinal cohort were classified into quantile groups based on average daily sedentary time (most sedentary, quartile 1 [Q1] ≥11.6h; 10.7h≤ Q2 <11.6h; 9.7h≤ Q3 <10.7h; least sedentary, Q4 <9.7h).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Individual QALYs were estimated over 2 years from the area under the curve of health-related utility scores derived from the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey versus time. The relationship between baseline sedentary behavior and median 2-year QALYs was estimated using quantile regression adjusted for socioeconomic factors and body mass index.

RESULTS

Lower QALYs over 2 years were more frequently found among the most sedentary (Q1, median 1.59), and QALYs increased as time spent in baseline sedentary behavior decreased (median QALYs for Q2, 1.64; Q3, 1.65; Q4, 1.65). The relationship of sedentary time and median QALY change was only significant for the most sedentary Q1 group, where an additional hour of sedentary behavior significantly reduced QALYs by -.072 (95% confidence interval, -.121 to -.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that individuals with the most extreme sedentary profiles may be vulnerable to additional losses of quality of life if they become more sedentary. Targeting these individuals to decrease sedentary behavior has the potential to be cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for the management of osteoarthritis: a systematic review of the literature

Background

The primary purpose of this study is to assess the existing evidence on the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for the management of knee and hip osteoarthritis by systematically reviewing published economic evaluation studies.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted for the period 2004 to 2016. Electronic databases were searched to identify both trial and model based economic evaluation studies that evaluated surgical interventions for knee and hip osteoarthritis.

Results

A total of 23 studies met the inclusion criteria and an assessment of these studies showed that total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) showed evidence of cost-effectiveness and improvement in quality of life of the patients when compared to non-operative and non-surgical procedures. On the other hand, even though delaying TKA and THA may lead to some cost savings in the short-run, the results from the study showed that this was not a cost-effective option.

Conclusions

TKA and THA are cost-effective and should be recommended for the management of patients with end stage/severe knee and hip OA. However, there needs to be additional studies to assess the cost-effectiveness of other surgical interventions in order for definite conclusions to be reached.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-017-1540-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Determining Cost-Effectiveness of Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Using the Short Form-6D Utility Measure

BACKGROUND

With the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, cost-effectiveness analyses are becoming increasingly important for resource allocation, and particularly for the justification of costly procedures, such as total knee and total hip arthroplasties (TKAs and THAs). Therefore, using the Short Form-6D (SF-6D) utility values, the purpose of this study was to determine (1) the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and (2) and the cost-effectiveness of undergoing THA and TKA.

METHODS

A total of 844 patients (357 men, 487 women) who had a mean age of 65 years (range, 39 to 80 years) underwent primary TKA, and 224 patients who had a mean age of 69 years (range, 44 to 88 years) underwent primary THAs at 7 institutions. The SF-6D values were derived for each patient preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up. QALYs were estimated at 1 year, and lifetime QALYs gained were determined using predicted life-expectancy values, at a discounted rate of 3% per year of life expectancy, to reflect a diminishing gain with time. National-level costs were determined using the 2011 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were deduced for both groups.

RESULTS

The preoperative SF-6D values for the THA and TKA cohorts were 0.614 (range, 0.37 to 1) and 0.62 (range, 0.3 to 0.93). Postoperatively, SF-6D values improved significantly at 1 year in both groups. One-year QALYs for TKA and THA were 0.768 and 0.799. Lifetime QALYs gained for the groups were 2.07 and 1.85 (1.39 and 1.34 if discounted at a rate of 3% per year). The estimated ICER for TKA vs baseline presurgery was $43,107 per QALY, and $39,453 per QALY for THA vs baseline presurgery.

CONCLUSION

The ICER showed that THA and TKA are cost-effective, compared to the $50,000 USD/QALY threshold for cost-effectiveness, and justify resources allocated to these surgeries. The SF-6D can utilize existing functional outcome data, which makes these cost calculations considerably easier and more feasible for practicing orthopedists.

Supervised neuromuscular exercise prior to hip and knee replacement: 12-month clinical effect and cost-utility analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial

Background

There are indications of beneficial short-term effect of pre-operative exercise in reducing pain and improving activity of daily living after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. Though, information from studies conducting longer follow-ups and economic evaluations of exercise prior to THR and TKR is needed. The aim of the study was to analyse 12-month clinical effect and cost-utility of supervised neuromuscular exercise prior to THR and TKR surgery.

Methods

The study was conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial including 165 patients scheduled for standard THR or TKR at a hospital located in a rural area of Denmark. The patients were randomised to replacement surgery with or without an 8-week preoperative supervised neuromuscular exercise program (Clinical Trials registration no.: NCT01003756). Clinical effect was measured with Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were based on EQ-5D-3L and Danish preference weights. Resource use was extracted from national registries and valued using standard tariffs (2012-EUR). Incremental net benefit was analysed to estimate the probability for the intervention being cost effective for a range of threshold values. A health care sector perspective was applied.

Results

HOOS/KOOS quality of life [8.25 (95% CI, 0.42 to 16.10)] and QALYs [0.04 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.07)] were statistically significantly improved. Effect-sizes ranged between 0.09-0.59 for HOOS/KOOS subscales. Despite including an intervention cost of €326 per patient, there was no difference in total cost between groups [€132 (95% CI −3942 to 3679)]. At a threshold of €40,000, preoperative exercise was found to be cost effective at 84% probability.

Conclusion

Preoperative supervised neuromuscular exercise for 8 weeks was found to be cost-effective in patients scheduled for THR and TKR surgery at conventional thresholds for willingness to pay. One-year clinical effects were small to moderate and favoured the intervention group, but only statistically significant for quality of life measures.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01003756) October 28, 2009.

Cost-Utility and Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Face-to-Face Versus Telephone-Based Nonpharmacologic Multidisciplinary Treatments for Patients With Generalized Osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate, from a societal perspective, the cost utility and cost effectiveness of a nonpharmacologic face-to-face treatment program compared with a telephone-based treatment program for patients with generalized osteoarthritis (GOA).

METHODS

An economic evaluation was carried out alongside a randomized clinical trial involving 147 patients with GOA. Program costs were estimated from time registrations. One-year medical and nonmedical costs were estimated using cost questionnaires. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated using the EuroQol (EQ) classification system, EQ rating scale, and the Short Form 6D (SF-6D). Daily function was measured using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) disability index (DI). Cost and QALY/effect differences were analyzed using multilevel regression analysis and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

Medical costs of the face-to-face treatment and telephone-based treatment were estimated at €387 and €252, respectively. The difference in total societal costs was nonsignificantly in favor of the face-to-face program (difference €708; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] -€5,058, €3,642). QALYs were similar for both groups according to the EQ, but were significantly in favor of the face-to-face group, according to the SF-6D (difference 0.022 [95% CI 0.000, 0.045]). Daily function was similar according to the HAQ DI. Since both societal costs and QALYs/effects were in favor of the face-to-face program, the economic assessment favored this program, regardless of society's willingness to pay. There was a 65-90% chance that the face-to-face program had better cost utility and a 60-70% chance of being cost effective.

CONCLUSION

This economic evaluation from a societal perspective showed that a nonpharmacologic, face-to-face treatment program for patients with GOA was likely to be cost effective, relative to a telephone-based program.

Species-Independent Modeling of High-Frequency Ultrasound Backscatter in Hyaline Cartilage

Apparent integrated backscatter (AIB) is a common ultrasound parameter used to assess cartilage matrix degeneration. However, the specific contributions of chondrocytes, proteoglycan and collagen to AIB remain unknown. To reveal these relationships, this work examined biopsies and cross sections of human, ovine and bovine cartilage with 40-MHz ultrasound biomicroscopy. Site-matched estimates of collagen concentration, proteoglycan concentration, collagen orientation and cell number density were employed in quasi-least-squares linear regression analyses to model AIB. A positive correlation (R(2) = 0.51, p < 10(-4)) between AIB and a combination model of cell number density and collagen concentration was obtained for collagen orientations approximately perpendicular (>70°) to the sound beam direction. These findings indicate causal relationships between AIB and cartilage structural parameters and could aid in more sophisticated future interpretations of ultrasound backscatter.

Cost-Effectiveness of Physical Therapy Only and of Usual Care for Various Health Conditions: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Given continually rising health care costs, interventions of health care providers should be cost-effective.

PURPOSE

This review aimed to summarize current cost-effectiveness of physical therapy. Specific aims were: (1) to analyze cost-effectiveness of physical therapy only compared with usual care only, (2) to analyze cost-effectiveness of physical therapy added to usual care compared with usual care only, and (3) to specify in which health conditions physical therapy only or physical therapy added to usual care was cost-effective.

DATA SOURCES

Topic-related systematic reviews were searched in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PEDro, and Cochrane Library and manually.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies published between 1998 and 2014 that investigated the cost-effectiveness of interventions carried out by physical therapists were reviewed. The methodological quality was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias assessment for intervention studies and with the Quality of Health Economic Analyses Scale.

DATA EXTRACTION

Effectiveness and cost data for calculating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and the original authors' conclusions were extracted.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The 18 included studies presented low risk of bias and contained 8 comparisons of physical therapy only with usual care only and 11 comparisons of physical therapy added to usual care with usual care only. Based on ICERs, physical therapy only or added to usual care was cost-effective in 9 out of the 19 comparisons and in 10 comparisons according to the original authors' conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Physical therapy only or added to usual care implies improved health in almost all studies. The cost-effectiveness of such interventions was demonstrated in half of the studies. This result might have been influenced by the fact that different definitions of the notion of "cost-effectiveness" exist.

Effectiveness and efficiency of an 11-week exercise intervention for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: a protocol for a controlled study in the context of health services research

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis is the most common reason for pain in older adults, and the individual and economic burden of this disease is immense. The chronic character of osteoarthritis requires a long-term therapeutic treatment. In this regard life-style interventions such as physical exercises that can be carried out by the patient himself are recommended as first line treatment. There is evidence for the short-term benefit of exercise therapy in terms of pain reduction and physical functioning. Nonetheless research agendas highlight the need for multifaceted interventions that incorporate exercise strategies into patient care. Studies should be conducted with appropriate sample sizes and should allow statements on long-term effects as well as cost-utility and safety. These open questions are under the scope of this study.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a controlled study in the context of health services research. The study population consists of n = 1400 subjects with hip or knee osteoarthritis. The intervention group will be recruited from participants of a country-wide health insurance offer for people with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Potential participants for the control group (ratio 10:1 (control vs. intervention) will be filtered out from the insurance data base according to pre-defined matching criteria and asked by letter for their participation. The final statistical twins from the responders (1:1) will be determined via propensity score matching. The progressive training intervention comprises 8 supervised group sessions, supplemented by home exercises (2/week over 11 weeks). Exercises include mobilization, strengthening and training of postural control. Primary outcomes are pain and function measured with the WOMAC Index immediately after the intervention period. Among other things, health related quality of life, self-efficacy, cost utility and safety will be evaluated as secondary outcomes. Participants will be followed up 6, 12 and 24 month after baseline.

DISCUSSION

Results of this trial will document the effects of clinical as well as economic outcomes in a regular health care setting on the basis of a large sample size. As such, results of this trial might have great impact on future implementations of group- and home-based exercises in hip or knee osteoarthritis.

TRAIL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00009251 . Registered 10 September 2015.

How does surgery compare with advanced intra-articular therapies in knee osteoarthritis: current thoughts

The objectives of osteoarthritis (OA) management are to reduce pain and inflammation, slow cartilage degradation, improve function and reduce disability. Current strategies for managing knee OA include nonpharmacological interventions, oral pharmacological treatments, localized intra-articular injections, and surgery. It has become evident that the inflammatory response is a key contributor to the development and progression of knee OA. Signaling pathways involving growth factors and cytokines are being investigated for the development of new therapies that target the underlying biological processes causing the disease. This concept of 'molecular orthopedics' enables more patient-centered diagnostic and treatment strategies. In contrast to other conservative therapies, which ultimately only address OA symptoms, intra-articular injections, in particular autologous conditioned serum (ACS), provide benefits that have the potential to outweigh those of established pharmacological treatments and surgery. Surgery has historically been considered the final solution for treatment of knee OA, both by treating physicians and by patients; however, there are increasing concerns regarding the lack of randomized clinical trials providing evidence to support this opinion. Intra-articular injection of ACS has demonstrated efficacy as a treatment for knee OA in a number of studies, with a very low rate of adverse events and side effects, compared with surgery. Treatment with ACS utilizes the release of anti-inflammatory cytokines and regenerative growth factors to support the natural healing processes in the knee, and has the potential to provide a valuable alternative to surgical intervention.

Systematic overview of economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Health related rehabilitation is instrumental in improving functioning and promoting participation by people with disabilities. To make clinical and policy decisions about health-related rehabilitation, resource allocation and cost issues need to be considered.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) on economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation.

METHODS

We searched multiple databases to identify relevant SRs of economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation. Review quality was assessed by AMSTAR checklist.

RESULTS

We included 64 SRs, most of which included economic evaluations alongside randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The review quality was low to moderate (AMSTAR score 5-8) in 35, and high (score 9-11) in 29 of the included SRs. The included SRs addressed various health conditions, including spinal or other pain conditions (n = 14), age-related problems (11), stroke (7), musculoskeletal disorders (6), heart diseases (4), pulmonary (3), mental health problems (3), and injury (3). Physiotherapy was the most commonly evaluated rehabilitation intervention in the included SRs (n = 24). Other commonly evaluated interventions included multidisciplinary programmes (14); behavioral, educational or psychological interventions (11); home-based interventions (11); complementary therapy (6); self-management (6); and occupational therapy (4).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the available evidence is often described as limited, inconsistent or inconclusive, some rehabilitation interventions were cost-effective or showed cost-saving in a variety of disability conditions. Available evidence comes predominantly from high income countries, therefore economic evaluations of health-related rehabilitation are urgently required in less resourced settings.

OARSI Clinical Trials Recommendations: Design and conduct of clinical trials of rehabilitation interventions for osteoarthritis

A Task Force of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) has previously published a set of guidelines for the conduct of clinical trials in osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and knee. Limited material available on clinical trials of rehabilitation in people with OA has prompted OARSI to establish a separate Task Force to elaborate guidelines encompassing special issues relating to rehabilitation of OA. The Task Force identified three main categories of rehabilitation clinical trials. The categories included non-operative rehabilitation trials, post-operative rehabilitation trials, and trials examining the effectiveness of devices (e.g., assistive devices, bracing, physical agents, electrical stimulation, etc.) that are used in rehabilitation of people with OA. In addition, the Task Force identified two main categories of outcomes in rehabilitation clinical trials, which include outcomes related to symptoms and function, and outcomes related to disease modification. The guidelines for rehabilitation clinical trials provided in this report encompass these main categories. The report provides guidelines for conducting and reporting on randomized clinical trials. The topics include considerations for entering patients into trials, issues related to conducting trials, considerations for selecting outcome measures, and recommendations for statistical analyses and reporting of results. The focus of the report is on rehabilitation trials for hip, knee and hand OA, however, we believe the content is broad enough that it could be applied to rehabilitation trials for other regions as well.

An 8-Week Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment Program of Hyaluronic Acid Injection, Deliberate Physical Rehabilitation, and Patient Education is Cost Effective at 2 Years Follow-up: The OsteoArthritis Centers of America(SM) Experience

Numerous nonsurgical interventions have been reported to improve symptoms of knee osteoarthritis (OA) over the short term. However, longer follow-up is required to accurately characterize outcomes such as cost effectiveness and delayed arthroplasty. A total of 553 patients with symptomatic knee OA who previously underwent a single 8-week multimodal treatment program were contacted at 1 year (n = 336) or 2 years (n = 217) follow-up. The percentage of patients who underwent knee arthroplasty was 10% at 1 year and 18% at 2 years following program completion. The treatment program was highly cost effective at $12,800 per quality-adjusted life year at 2 years. Cost effectiveness was maintained under a variety of plausible assumptions and regardless of gender, age, body mass index, disease severity, or knee pain severity. In summary, a single 8-week multimodal knee OA treatment program is cost effective and may lower knee arthroplasty utilization through 2 years follow-up.

Knee osteoarthritis: Clinical connections to articular cartilage structure and function

Articular cartilage is a unique biphasic material that supports a lifetime of compressive and shear forces across joints. When articular cartilage deteriorates, whether due to injury, wear and tear or normal aging, osteoarthritis and resultant pain can ensue. Understanding the basic science of the structure and biomechanics of articular cartilage can help clinicians guide their patients to appropriate activity and loading choices. The purpose of this article is to examine how articular cartilage structure and mechanics, may interact with risk factors to contribute to OA and how this interaction provides guidelines for intervention choices This paper will review the microstructure of articular cartilage, its mechanical properties and link this information to clinical decision making.

A reference case for economic evaluations in osteoarthritis: an expert consensus article from the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO)

BACKGROUND

General recommendations for a reference case for economic studies in rheumatic diseases were published in 2002 in an initiative to improve the comparability of cost-effectiveness studies in the field. Since then, economic evaluations in osteoarthritis (OA) continue to show considerable heterogeneity in methodological approach.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a reference case specific for economic studies in OA, including the standard optimal care, with which to judge new pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions.

METHODS

Four subgroups of an ESCEO expert working group on economic assessments (13 experts representing diverse aspects of clinical research and/or economic evaluations) were charged with producing lists of recommendations that would potentially improve the comparability of economic analyses in OA: outcome measures, comparators, costs and methodology. These proposals were discussed and refined during a face-to-face meeting in 2013. They are presented here in the format of the recommendations of the recently published Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, so that an initiative on economic analysis methodology might be consolidated with an initiative on reporting standards.

RESULTS

Overall, three distinct reference cases are proposed, one for each hand, knee and hip OA; with diagnostic variations in the first two, giving rise to different treatment options: interphalangeal or thumb-based disease for hand OA and the presence or absence of joint malalignment for knee OA. A set of management strategies is proposed, which should be further evaluated to help establish a consensus on the "standard optimal care" in each proposed reference case. The recommendations on outcome measures, cost itemisation and methodological approaches are also provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The ESCEO group proposes a set of disease-specific recommendations on the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations in OA that could help the standardisation and comparability of studies that evaluate therapeutic strategies of OA in terms of costs and effectiveness.