ArticleOrthopedic reviews2017
Value-based procurement of prostheses for total knee replacement.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Barriers and Enablers of Value-Based Procurement in Dutch Healthcare Providers.International journal of health policy and management · 2025Article
- Value-Based Healthcare in Cardiology: How to Integrate a more Comprehensive View into Medical Decision-Making?Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Review
- Article
- Value-Based procurement for medical devices: A scoping review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Article
- Pay less and spend more-the real value in healthcare procurement.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cost-effectiveness evaluations concerning devices for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have little impact on real-life management of these devices. This study explored how pharmacoeconomic models can inform the procurement of TKA devices to improve their value for money. Our study included three phases: i) literature search for data of outcome, cost, and device type in TKA; ii) development of a Markov model predicting costs, QALYs, and net monetary benefit (NMB); iii) simulation of tenders aimed at value-based device procurement. Phases 1 and 2 were managed by selecting a single study as the source of data for our analysis. In Phase 3, each TKA device was associated with its values of NMB, and the tender scores were estimated. Finally, the ranking of each device in the simulated tender was determined. We identified a study published in 2016 as our source of data. Five devices were evaluated. For these devices, QALYs were 7.3952, 7.2939, 7.4952, 7.1919, 7.2930; NMB: £142,005, £140,653, £144,184, £138,040, £140,261; tender scores: 64.53, 42.53, 100, 0, 36.15, respectively. We showed that incorporating the principles of cost-effectiveness into the tendering process is feasible for TKA devices. This can maximize the value for money for these devices.
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.