ArticleInternational orthopaedics2020
Metal on metal hip arthroplasty surveillance at a tertiary centre: design, patients' adherence, and cost analysis.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMetal-on-metal (MOM) bearings may carry higher than expected revision rates and serious complications: an appropriate surveillance may be advocated. Aims of this paper were to (1) present the biennial experience of MOM surveillance in a tertiary centre, (2) describe the patients' adherence to monitoring, and (3) analyze the costs of the surveillance
methodsThe design of MOM surveillance was developed according to the guidelines of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. The adherence to every follow-up was expressed as raw numbers and percentages. A cost analysis (direct and indirect costs) was conducted and projected in a five year time span.
resultsAbout 61.1% of patients adhered to the first step of the surveillance, and 13.5% answered to a specific questionnaire about MOM implant. About 36.2% of the patients participated for the annual follow-up, and 18.1% entered the six month follow-up program. Of the implants, 2.5% required a revision. A two year surveillance costs €45,520.30, €236,443.98 (57.7%) including revisions. Five-year projected costs will be €23.113,64 (5.6%). Hospital indirect costs, including personnel working days, were €150,392.30 (36.7%). The estimated economic burden for seven years will be €409,949.92 (direct € 259,557.62, indirect €150,392.30).
conclusionPatients' adherence to MOM surveillance is modest and the rate of dropouts seems not to stop over the time. Most of the expenses are due to revision surgeries, as well as indirect costs. Economy of scale may be suggested to reduce the costs, involving as much MOM population as possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32642825What 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.