ArticleThe Journal of hand surgery2012
Treatment of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: cost-utility analysis.
Article in The Journal of hand surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-utility studies in upper limb orthopaedic surgery: a systematic review of published literature.The bone & joint journal · 2018Pooled it
- Treatment for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Article
- Calculating Value in Hand and Wrist Care: A Systematic Review on the Current Literature.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2025Article
- Direct Economic Burden of Cubital Tunnel Surgery in the United States: Total Payments and Components of Cost.The Journal of hand surgery · 2025Article
- Cost of surgical treatment for ulnar nerve entrapment in Finland, 2011-2015: a registry-based cost description study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Electrodiagnostic Predictors of Outcomes After In Situ Decompression of the Ulnar Nerve.The Journal of hand surgery · 2023Article
- A Systematic Review of Health State Utility Values in the Plastic Surgery Literature.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2021Article
- Long-term Reoperation Rate for Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: Subcutaneous Transposition Versus In Situ Decompression.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- Cubital tunnel syndrome: a surgical modification to in situ decompression to improve results.JSES international · 2020Article
- Comparison of Surgical Encounter Direct Costs for Three Methods of Cubital Tunnel Decompression.Plastic and reconstructive surgery · 2019Article
- Predictors of surgical outcomes after in situ ulnar nerve decompression for cubital tunnel syndrome.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Article
- Simultaneous Bilateral Versus Staged Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Release: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis.The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · 2016Article
- Setting expectations following endoscopic cubital tunnel release.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2014Article
- Minimal-incision in situ ulnar nerve decompression at the elbow.Hand clinics · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe choice of surgical treatment for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE) remains controversial. A cost-utility analysis was performed for 4 surgical UNE treatment options. We hypothesized that simple decompression would emerge as the most cost-effective strategy.
methodsA cost-utility analysis was performed from the societal perspective. A decision analytic model was designed comparing 4 strategies: (1) simple decompression followed by a salvage surgery (anterior submuscular transposition) for a poor outcome, (2) anterior subcutaneous transposition followed by a salvage surgery for a poor outcome, (3) medial epicondylectomy followed by a salvage surgery for a poor outcome, and (4) anterior submuscular transposition. A poor outcome when anterior submuscular transposition was the initial surgery was considered an end point in the model. Preference values for temporary health states for UNE, the surgical procedures, and the complications were obtained through a time trade-off survey administered to family members and friends who accompanied patients to physician visits. Probabilities of clinical outcomes were derived from a Cochrane Collaboration meta-analysis and a systematic MEDLINE and EMBASE search of the literature. Medical care costs (in 2009 U.S. dollars) were derived from Medicare reimbursement rates. The model estimated quality-adjusted life-years and costs for a 3-year time horizon. A 3% annual discount rate was applied to costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated, and sensitivity analyses performed.
resultsSimple decompression as an initial procedure was the most cost-effective treatment strategy. A multi-way sensitivity analysis varying the preference values for the surgeries and a model structure sensitivity analysis varying the model assumptions did not change the conclusion. Under all evaluated scenarios, simple decompression yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratios less than US$2,027 per quality-adjusted life-year.
conclusionsSimple decompression as an initial treatment option is cost-effective for UNE according to commonly used cost-effectiveness thresholds. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.