How do the costs of physical therapy and arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compare? A trial-based economic evaluation of two treatments in patients with meniscal tears alongside the ESCAPE study
Victor A van de Graaf, Johanna M van Dongen, Nienke W Willigenburg, Julia C A Noorduyn, Ise K Butter, Arthur de Gast, Daniel B F Saris, Maurits W van Tulder, Rudolf W Poolman, ESCAPE Research Group, Vab Scholtes, Elar Mutsaerts, J Wolkenfelt, M R Krijnen, Dfp Deurzen van, Djf Moojen, C H Bloembergen, T Snijders, J J Halma, C Neeter, Gmmj Kerkhoffs, R W Peters, Icjb van den Brand, S deVos-Jakobs, A B Spoor, T Gosens, W Rezaie, D J Hofstee, B J Burger, D Haverkamp, Amjs Vervest, T A van Rheenen, A E Wijsbek, Era van Arkel, Bjw Thomassen, S Sprague, Bwj Mol, N Wolterbeek, Victor A van de Graaf, Johanna M van Dongen, Nienke W Willigenburg, Julia C A Noorduyn, Ise K Butter, Arthur de Gast, Daniel B F Saris, Maurits W van Tulder, Rudolf W Poolman, ESCAPE Research Group, Vab Scholtes, Elar Mutsaerts, J Wolkenfelt, M R Krijnen, Dfp Deurzen van, Djf Moojen, C H Bloembergen, T Snijders, J J Halma, C Neeter, Gmmj Kerkhoffs, R W Peters, Icjb van den Brand, S deVos-Jakobs, A B Spoor, T Gosens, W Rezaie, D J Hofstee, B J Burger, D Haverkamp, Amjs Vervest, T A van Rheenen, A E Wijsbek, Era van Arkel, Bjw Thomassen, S Sprague, Bwj Mol, N Wolterbeek
Abstract
Objectives: To examine whether physical therapy (PT) is cost-effective compared with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) in patients with a non-obstructive meniscal tear, we performed a full trial-based economic evaluation from a societal perspective. In a secondary analysis-this paper-we examined whether PT is non-inferior to APM.
Methods: We recruited patients aged 45-70 years with a non-obstructive meniscal tear in nine Dutch hospitals. Resource use was measured using web-based questionnaires. Measures of effectiveness included knee function using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Follow-up was 24 months. Uncertainty was assessed using bootstrapping techniques. The non-inferiority margins for societal costs, the IKDC and QALYs, were €670, 8 points and 0.057 points, respectively.
Results: We randomly assigned 321 patients to PT (n=162) or APM (n=159). PT was associated with significantly lower costs after 24 months compared with APM (-€1803; 95% CI -€3008 to -€838). The probability of PT being cost-effective compared with APM was 1.00 at a willingness to pay of €0/unit of effect for the IKDC (knee function) and QALYs (quality of life) and decreased with increasing values of willingness to pay. The probability that PT is non-inferior to APM was 0.97 for all non-inferiority margins for the IKDC and 0.89 for QALYs.
Conclusions: The probability of PT being cost-effective compared with APM was relatively high at reasonable values of willingness to pay for the IKDC and QALYs. Also, PT had a relatively high probability of being non-inferior to APM for both outcomes. This warrants further deimplementation of APM in patients with non-obstructive meniscal tears.
Trial registration numbers: NCT01850719 and NTR3908.
Keywords: arthroscopic partial meniscectomy; economic evaluation; knee; physical therapy; randomised controlled trial.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: all authors had financial support from The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (in Dutch: ZonMw) for the submitted work; the Achmea Healthcare Foundation (in Dutch Stichting Achmea Gezonheidszorg fonds) and the foundation of medical research at the OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Figures
References
- Järvinen TLN, Guyatt GH. Arthroscopic surgery for knee pain. BMJ 2016;354 10.1136/bmj.i3934
- Siemieniuk RAC, Harris IA, Agoritsas T, et al. . Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee arthritis and meniscal tears: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ 1982;2017 j.
- Järvinen TLN, Sihvonen R, Englund M. Arthroscopy for degenerative knee—a difficult habit to break? Acta Orthopaedica 2014;85:215–7. 10.3109/17453674.2014.922736
- Rongen JJ, Govers TM, Buma P, et al. . Arthroscopic meniscectomy for degenerative meniscal tears reduces knee pain but is not cost-effective in a routine health care setting: a multi-center longitudinal observational study using data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2017.
- Bosmans JE, de Bruijne MC, van Hout HPJ, et al. . Practical guidelines for economic evaluations alongside equivalence trials. Value in Health 2008;11:251–8. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00245.x
- van de Graaf VA, Noorduyn JCA, Willigenburg NW, et al. . Effect of early surgery vs physical therapy on knee function among patients with nonobstructive meniscal tears. JAMA 2018;320:1328–37. 10.1001/jama.2018.13308
- Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of Osteo-Arthrosis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 1957;16:494–502. 10.1136/ard.16.4.494
- van de Graaf VA, Scholtes VAB, Wolterbeek N, et al. . Cost-effectiveness of Early Surgery versus Conservative Treatment with Optional Delayed Meniscectomy for Patients over 45 years with non-obstructive meniscal tears (ESCAPE study): protocol of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2016;6:e014381 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014381
- van Arkel ERA, van Essen A, Koëter S, et al. . Artroscopie van de knie: indicatie en behandeling. Dutch orthopedic association guideline 2011. website Dutch orthopedic association, 2012. Available:
- Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, et al. . Development and validation of the International knee documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 2001;29:600–13. 10.1177/03635465010290051301
- Crawford K, Briggs KK, Rodkey WG, et al. . Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the IKDC score for meniscus injuries of the knee. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery 2007;23:839–44. 10.1016/j.arthro.2007.02.005
- van de Graaf VA, Wolterbeek N, Scholtes VA, et al. . Reliability and validity of the IKDC, KOOS, and WOMAC for patients with meniscal injuries. Am J Sports Med 2014.
- EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199–208. 10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9
- M. Versteegh M, M. Vermeulen K, M. A. A. Evers S, et al. . Dutch tariff for the five-level version of EQ-5D. Value in Health 2016;19:343–52. 10.1016/j.jval.2016.01.003
- Hakkaart-van RL, van der Linden N, Bouwmans CA, et al. . Bijlage 1: Kostenhandleiding: Methodologie van kostenonderzoek en referentieprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidszorg. Zorginstituut Nederland, 2015.
- Zorgautoriteit N, Onderhoud DBC, 2017. Available:
- Bouwmans C, Krol M, Severens H, et al. . The iMTA productivity cost questionnaire: a standardized instrument for measuring and Valuing health-related productivity losses. Value Health 2015;18:753–8.
- White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Statist. Med. 2011;30:377–99. 10.1002/sim.4067
- Willan AR, Briggs AH, Hoch JS. Regression methods for covariate adjustment and subgroup analysis for non-censored cost-effectiveness data. Health Econ. 2004;13:461–75. 10.1002/hec.843
- Walters SJ, Brazier JE. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005;14:1523–32. 10.1007/s11136-004-7713-0
- Luo N, Johnson JA, Coons SJ. Using instrument-defined health state transitions to estimate minimally important differences for four preference-based health-related quality of life instruments. Medical Care 2010;48:365–71. 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181c162a2
- van Dongen JM, van Wier MF, Tompa E, et al. . Trial-based economic evaluations in occupational health: principles, methods, and recommendations. J Occup Environ Med 2014;56:563–72.
- Shiell A, Donaldson C, Mitton C. Health economic evaluation. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:85–8. 10.1136/jech.56.2.85
- Stone JA, Salzler MJ, Parker DA, et al. . Degenerative meniscus tears - assimilation of evidence and consensus statements across three continents: state of the art. J Isakos 2017;2:108–19. 10.1136/jisakos-2015-000003
- Katz JN, Losina E. The cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: comparing apples and oranges. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2017.
- Rongen JJ, Rovers MM, van Tienen TG, et al. . Increased risk for knee replacement surgery after arthroscopic surgery for degenerative meniscal tears: a multi-center longitudinal observational study using data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2017;25:23–9. 10.1016/j.joca.2016.09.013
- MacNeil Vroomen J, Eekhout I, Dijkgraaf MG, et al. . Multiple imputation strategies for zero-inflated cost data in economic evaluations: which method works best? Eur J Health Econ 2016;17:939–50. 10.1007/s10198-015-0734-5
- Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, et al. . Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (cheers) statement. BMJ 2013;346:f1049 10.1136/bmj.f1049
- Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, et al. . Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
- Petrou S, Gray A. Economic evaluation alongside randomised controlled trials: design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. BMJ 2011;342:d1548 10.1136/bmj.d1548
- Hakkaart-van RL, Tan SS, Bouwmans CA. Handleiding voor kostenonderzoek: Methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties in de gezondheidzorg Diemen. College voor Zorgverzekeringen 2010.
- van Buuren S, Boshuizen HC, Knook DL. Multiple imputation of missing blood pressure covariates in survival analysis. Statist. Med. 1999;18:681–94. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19990330)18:6<681::AID-SIM71>;2-R
- Stewart WF, Ricci JA, Chee E. Lost productive time and cost due to common pain conditions in the US workforce. JAMA 2003;290:2443–54. 10.1001/jama.290.18.2443
- Gauffin H, Tagesson S, Meunier A, et al. . Knee arthroscopic surgery is beneficial to middle-aged patients with meniscal symptoms: a prospective, randomised, single-blinded study. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2014;22:1808–16. 10.1016/j.joca.2014.07.017
- Herrlin S, Hållander M, Wange P, et al. . Arthroscopic or conservative treatment of degenerative medial meniscal tears: a prospective randomised trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007;15:393–401. 10.1007/s00167-006-0243-2
- Herrlin SV, Wange PO, Lapidus G, et al. . Is arthroscopic surgery beneficial in treating non-traumatic, degenerative medial meniscal tears? a five year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013;21:358–64. 10.1007/s00167-012-1960-3
- Katz JN, Brophy RH, Chaisson CE, et al. . Surgery versus physical therapy for a meniscal tear and osteoarthritis. N Engl J Med 2013;368:1675–84. 10.1056/NEJMoa1301408
- Sihvonen R, Paavola M, Malmivaara A, et al. . Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus sham surgery for a degenerative meniscal tear. N Engl J Med 2013;369:2515–24. 10.1056/NEJMoa1305189
- Yim J-H, Seon J-K, Song E-K, et al. . A comparative study of meniscectomy and Nonoperative treatment for degenerative horizontal tears of the medial meniscus. Am J Sports Med 2013;41:1565–70. 10.1177/0363546513488518
- Kise NJ, Risberg MA, Stensrud S, et al. . Exercise therapy versus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for degenerative meniscal tear in middle aged patients: randomised controlled trial with two year follow-up. BMJ 2016;354.
- Rongen JJ, van Tienen TG, Buma P, et al. . Meniscus surgery is still widely performed in the treatment of degenerative meniscus tears in the Netherlands. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017;41 10.1007/s00167-017-4473-2
- Brittberg M, Winalski CS. Evaluation of cartilage injuries and repair. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume 2003;85:58–69. 10.2106/00004623-200300002-00008
Source: PubMed