| 1. |
- Oeding, Jacob, et al.
(author)
-
Early Surgery for Partial Tears of the Ulnar Collateral Ligament May Be More Cost-Effective and Result in Longer Playing Careers Than Nonoperative Management for High-Level Baseball Pitchers: A Decision-Analytic Markov Model-Based Analysis
- 2024
-
In: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE. - 0363-5465 .- 1552-3365.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Nonoperative management versus early reconstruction for partial tears of the medial ulnar collateral ligament (MUCL) remains controversial, with the most common treatment options for partial tears consisting of rest, rehabilitation, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and/or surgical intervention. However, whether the improved outcomes reported for treatments such as MUCL reconstruction (UCLR) or nonoperative management with a series of PRP injections justifies their increased upfront costs remains unknown.Purpose: To compare the cost-effectiveness of an initial trial of physical therapy alone, an initial trial of physical therapy plus a series of PRP injections, and early UCLR to determine the preferred cost-effective treatment strategy for young, high-level baseball pitchers with partial tears of the MUCL and with aspirations to continue play at the next level (ie, collegiate and/or professional).Study Design: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2.Methods: A Markov chain Monte Carlo probabilistic model was developed to evaluate the outcomes and costs of 1000 young, high-level, simulated pitchers undergoing nonoperative management with and without PRP versus early UCLR for partial MUCL tears. Utility values, return to play rates, and transition probabilities were derived from the published literature. Costs were determined based on the typical patient undergoing each treatment strategy at the authors' institution. Outcome measures included costs, acquired playing years (PYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).Results: The mean total costs resulting from nonoperative management without PRP, nonoperative management with PRP, and early UCLR were $22,520, $24,800, and $43,992, respectively. On average, early UCLR produced an additional 4.0 PYs over the 10-year time horizon relative to nonoperative management, resulting in an ICER of $5395/PY, which falls well below the $50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Overall, early UCLR was determined to be the preferred cost-effective strategy in 77.5% of pitchers included in the microsimulation model, with nonoperative management with PRP determined to be the preferred strategy in 15% of pitchers and nonoperative management alone in 7.5% of pitchers.Conclusion: Despite increased upfront costs, UCLR is a more cost-effective treatment option for partial tears of the MUCL than an initial trial of nonoperative management for most high-level baseball pitchers.
|
|
| 2. |
- Oeding, Jacob, et al.
(author)
-
Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Alternative Injections for Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Systematic Review and Statistical Fragility Index-Based Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- 2024
-
In: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE. - 0363-5465 .- 1552-3365.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Based in part on the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that suggest a beneficial effect over alternative treatment options, the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) is widespread and increasing. However, the extent to which these studies are vulnerable to slight variations in the outcomes of patients remains unknown.Purpose: To evaluate the statistical fragility of conclusions from RCTs that reported outcomes of patients with knee OA who were treated with PRP versus alternative nonoperative management strategies.Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.Methods: All RCTs comparing PRP with alternative nonoperative treatment options for knee OA were identified. The fragility index (FI) and reverse FI were applied to assess the robustness of conclusions regarding the efficacy of PRP for knee OA. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the minimum number of patients from >= 1 trials included in the meta-analysis for which a modification on the event status would change the statistical significance of the pooled treatment effect.Results: In total, this analysis included outcomes from 1993 patients with a mean +/- SD age of 58.0 +/- 3.8 years. The mean number of events required to reverse significance of individual RCTs (FI) was 4.57 +/- 5.85. Based on random-effects meta-analyses, PRP demonstrated a significantly higher rate of successful outcomes when compared with hyaluronic acid (P = .002; odds ratio [OR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.33-3.62), as well as higher rates of patient-reported symptom relief (P = .019; OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.07-2.24), not requiring a reintervention after the initial injection treatment (P = .002; OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.33-3.53), and achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for pain improvement (P = .007; OR, 6.19; 95% CI, 1.63-23.42) when compared with all alternative nonoperative treatments. Overall, the mean number of events per meta-analysis required to change the statistical significance of the pooled treatment effect was 8.67 +/- 4.50.Conclusion: Conclusions drawn from individual RCTs evaluating PRP for knee OA demonstrated slight robustness. On meta-analysis, PRP demonstrated a significant advantage over hyaluronic acid as well as improved symptom relief, lower rates of reintervention, and more frequent achievement of the MCID for pain improvement when compared with alternative nonoperative treatment options. Statistically significant pooled treatment effects evaluating PRP for knee OA are more robust than approximately half of all comparable meta-analyses in medicine and health care. Future RCTs and meta-analyses should consider reporting FIs and fragility quotients to facilitate interpretation of results in their proper context.
|
|
