ArticleShoulder & elbow2024
Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus nonoperative management for first-time anterior shoulder instability: A cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Shoulder & elbow, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of Adding Remplissage to Bankart Repair for On-track Hill-Sachs Lesions: A Markov Decision Analysis.The American journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Approach to Treating Patients after First-time Anterior Shoulder Instability: What Does the Evidence Say?Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- Management of a first-time shoulder dislocation in the athlete: From ER to OR.Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025Review
- Conversion to Arthroscopic Surgery for Anterior Shoulder Instability Does Not Significantly Increase Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs, But Both Conversion and Initial Arthroscopic Management Are Twice as Costly as Isolated Nonoperative Management.Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association · 2025Article
- Arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without remplissage: a single-institution cost comparison.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Treatment of Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) may be more effective than nonoperative management for patients with anterior shoulder instability following first-time dislocation. The purpose of the study was to determine the most cost-effective treatment strategy by evaluating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ABR versus nonoperative treatment. Methods: This cost-effectiveness study utilized a Markov decision chain and Monte Carlo simulation. Probabilities, health utility values, and outcome data regarding ABR and nonoperative management of first-time shoulder instability derived from level I/II evidence. Costs were tabulated from Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed using >100,000 repetitions of the Monte Carlo simulation. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $50,000. Results: The expected cost for operative management higher than nonoperative management ($32,765 vs $29,343). However, ABR (5.48 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) was the more effective treatment strategy compared to nonoperative management (4.61 QALYs). The ICER for ABR was $3943. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that ABR was the most cost-effective strategy in 100% of simulations. Discussion: ABR is more cost-effective than nonoperative management for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation. The threshold analysis demonstrated that when accounting for WTP, ABR was found to be the more cost-effective strategy.
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.