ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2020
Cost Analysis in Shoulder Surgery: A Systematic Review.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Comparison of current relative value unit-based prices and utility between common surgical procedures, including orthopedic surgeries, in South Korea.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
- Subacromial Balloon Implantation for the Treatment of Irreparable Posterosuperior Rotator Cuff Tears.Arthroscopy techniques · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Latarjet reconstruction in anterior shoulder instability.International orthopaedics · 2023Article
- An Analysis of Shoulder Surgeon Volume on Surgeon Competency, Hospital Costs, and Adverse Events: A Systematic Review.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Shoulder conditions and health related quality of life and utility: a current concepts review.JSES international · 2022Review
- Comparison of outpatient vs. inpatient anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched analysis of 20,035 procedures.JSES international · 2022Article
- Pilots After Shoulder Surgery and Rehabilitation in a Dedicated Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Unit of a Major Airline Returned to Work Earlier When Compared to Standard Rehabilitation by External Providers.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCost analysis studies in medicine were uncommon in the past, but with the rising importance of financial considerations, it has become increasingly important to use available resources most efficiently. PURPOSE: To analyze the current state of cost-effectiveness analyses in shoulder surgery. STUDY
designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
methodsA systematic review of the current literature was performed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All full economic analyses published since January 1, 2010 and including the terms "cost analysis" and "shoulder" were checked for usability. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence and established health economic criteria (Quality of Health Economic Studies [QHES] instrument).
resultsA total of 34 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Compared with older studies, recent studies were of better quality: one level 1 study and eight level 2 studies were included. The mean QHES score was 87 of 100. The thematic focus of most studies (n = 13) was rotator cuff tears, with the main findings as follows: (1) magnetic resonance imaging is a cost-effective imaging strategy, (2) primary (arthroscopic) rotator cuff repair (RCR) with conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in case of failure is the most cost-effective strategy, (3) the platelet-rich plasma augmentation of RCR seems not to be cost-effective, and (4) the cost-effectiveness of double-row RCR remains unclear. Other studies included shoulder instability (n = 3), glenohumeral osteoarthritis (n = 3), proximal humeral fractures (n = 4), subacromial impingement (n = 4), and other shoulder conditions (n = 7).
conclusionCompared with prior studies, the quality of recently available studies has improved significantly. Current studies could help decision makers to appropriately and adequately allocate resources. The optimal use of financial resources will be of increasing importance to improve medical care for patients. However, further studies are still necessary.
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.