SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2018
What do we know about managing Dupuytren's disease cost-effectively?
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Collagenase injection versus limited fasciectomy surgery to treat Dupuytren's contracture in adult patients in the UK: DISC, a non-inferiority RCT and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- The effect of preoperative interventions on postoperative outcomes following elective hand surgery: A systematic review.Hand therapy · 2025Review
- Trends and Themes in the Study of Value in Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews on Health Economic Evaluation Studies Based on the CHEERS Statement: An Overview of Reviews.Iranian journal of public health · 2024Review
- Routine Pathological Examination of Clinically Presumed Dupuytren Disease: Does It Add Value?Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of adalimumab for early-stage Dupuytren's disease : an economic evaluation based on a randomized controlled trial and individual-patient simulation model.Bone & joint open · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Recurrent Dupuytren Contracture Treatment.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Current role of the collagenase Clostridium histolyticum in Dupuytren's disease treatment.Irish journal of medical science · 2020Review
- Economic evaluation plan of a randomised controlled trial of intra-nodular injection of anti-TNF and placebo among patients with early Dupuytren's disease: Repurposing Anti-TNF for Treating Dupuytren's Disease (RIDD).Wellcome open research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDupuytren's disease (DD) is a common and progressive, fibroproliferative disorder of the palmar and digital fascia of the hand. Various treatments have been recommended for advanced disease or to retard progression of early disease and to prevent deterioration of the finger contracture and quality of life. Recent studies have tried to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of therapies for DD, but there is currently no systematic assessment and appraisal of the economic evaluations.
methodsA systematic literature review was conducted, following PRISMA guidelines, to identify studies reporting economic evaluations of interventions for managing DD. Databases searched included the Ovid MEDLINE/Embase (without time restriction), National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database (all years) and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Journals Library) Health Technology Assessment (HTA). Cost-effectiveness analyses of treating DD were identified and their quality was assessed using the CHEERS assessment tool for quality of reporting and Phillips checklist for model evaluation.
resultsA total of 103 studies were screened, of which 4 met the study inclusion criteria. Two studies were from the US, one from the UK and one from Canada. They all assessed the same interventions for advanced DD, namely collagenase Clostridium histolyticum injection, percutaneous needle fasciotomy and partial fasciectomy. All studies conducting a cost-utility analysis, two implemented a decision analytic model and two a Markov model approach. None of them were based on a single randomised controlled trial, but rather synthesised evidence from various sources. Studies varied in their time horizon, sources of utility estimates and perspective of analysis. The overall quality of study reporting was good based on the CHEERS checklist. The quality of the model reporting in terms of model structure, data synthesis and model consistency varied across the included studies.
conclusionCost-effectiveness analyses for patients with advanced DD are limited and have applied different approaches with respect to modelling. Future studies should improve the way they are conducted and report their findings according to established guidance for conducting economic modelling of health care technologies.
trial registrationThe protocol was registered ( CRD42016032989 ; date 08/01/2016) with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews.
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.