The Journal of hand surgery · 2016
Cost of Immediate Surgery Versus Non-operative Treatment for Trigger Finger in Diabetic Patients.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Luther Gaurav Aman, Murthy Praveen, Blazar Philip E
Аннотация
PURPOSE: As health care costs continue to rise, providers must increasingly identify and implement cost-effective practice measures without sacrificing quality of care. Corticosteroid injections are an established treatment for trigger finger; however, numerous clinical trials have documented the limited efficacy of these injections in the diabetic population. Furthermore, the most cost-effective treatment strategy for diabetic trigger finger has not been determined. The purpose of this study was to perform a decision analysis to identify the least costly strategy for effective treatment of diabetic trigger finger using existing evidence in the literature.
METHODS: Four treatment strategies for diabetic trigger finger were identified: (1) 1 steroid injection followed by surgical release, (2) 2 steroid injections followed by surgical release, (3) immediate surgical release in the operating room, and (4) immediate surgical release in the clinic. A literature review was conducted to determine success rates of the different treatment strategies. Costing analysis was performed using our institutional reimbursement from Medicare. One-way sensitivity and threshold analysis was utilized to determine the least costly treatment strategy.
RESULTS: The least costly treatment strategy was immediate surgical release in the clinic. In patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, this strategy results in a 32% and a 39% cost reduction when compared with treatment with 1 or 2 corticosteroid injections, respectively. For 1 or 2 corticosteroid injections to be the most cost-effective strategy, injection failure rates would need to be less than 36% and 34%, respectively. The overall cost of care for immediate surgical release in the clinic was $642.
CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic trigger finger is a common problem faced by hand surgeons, with a variety of acceptable treatment algorithms. Management of diabetic trigger finger with immediate surgical release in the clinic is the most cost-effective treatment strategy, assuming a corticosteroid injection failure rate of at least 34%.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic/decision III.
METHODS: Four treatment strategies for diabetic trigger finger were identified: (1) 1 steroid injection followed by surgical release, (2) 2 steroid injections followed by surgical release, (3) immediate surgical release in the operating room, and (4) immediate surgical release in the clinic. A literature review was conducted to determine success rates of the different treatment strategies. Costing analysis was performed using our institutional reimbursement from Medicare. One-way sensitivity and threshold analysis was utilized to determine the least costly treatment strategy.
RESULTS: The least costly treatment strategy was immediate surgical release in the clinic. In patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, this strategy results in a 32% and a 39% cost reduction when compared with treatment with 1 or 2 corticosteroid injections, respectively. For 1 or 2 corticosteroid injections to be the most cost-effective strategy, injection failure rates would need to be less than 36% and 34%, respectively. The overall cost of care for immediate surgical release in the clinic was $642.
CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic trigger finger is a common problem faced by hand surgeons, with a variety of acceptable treatment algorithms. Management of diabetic trigger finger with immediate surgical release in the clinic is the most cost-effective treatment strategy, assuming a corticosteroid injection failure rate of at least 34%.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic/decision III.