Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40480644›Full record

ArticleBone & joint open2025

Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic-arm assisted versus manual total knee arthroplasty in the UK.

Gurdeep S Sagoo, Nick D Clement, Yaneth Gil-Rojas, Nawaraj Bhattarai, Steven Galloway, Jenny B Baron, Karen Smith, David J Weir, David J Deehan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone & joint open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Gurdeep S SagooPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Nick D ClementEdinburgh Orthopaedics, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Yaneth Gil-RojasPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Nawaraj BhattaraiPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Steven GallowayNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Jenny B BaronNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Karen SmithNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
David J WeirNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
David J DeehanEdinburgh Orthopaedics, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

Stryker
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this study was to estimate the additional cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) compared to manually performed total knee arthroplasty (mTKA). Methods: An economic evaluation was undertaken from the UK NHS and personal social services perspective, alongside a randomized controlled trial comparing rTKA and mTKA. Costs were estimated individually using a top-down approach and included all healthcare resources incurred during the trial. Costs were presented in 2021 GBP sterling (£). Responses to the EuroQol five-dimension three-level questionnaire were used to estimate QALYs for each participant. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was evaluated against the current willingness-to-pay threshold recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Stochastic sensitivity analysis was performed using bootstrapping techniques, and results were shown through the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve and cost-effectiveness plane. Cost-effectiveness over one- and ten-year time horizons were explored using a decision model. Results: There were 100 participants randomized: 50 rTKA and 50 mTKA. Overall, 37 participants (39.4%) had some missing data on either costs or utilities, or on both. Multiple imputation was used for the base case results. The intervention was associated with incremental mean per-patient costs of £1,829 (95% CI 421 to 3,238) and an incremental QALY gain of 0.015 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.0796) at one year. The ICER at one year was £123,770. However, rTKA was likely to be cost-effective over a ten-year time horizon, with an ICER of £11,109. All except one of the scenarios (QALY gain reduction to 0.005) explored supported the cost-effectiveness of rTKA over a ten-year time horizon with an ICER below a £20,000 threshold. Conclusion: Over a short one-year time horizon, rTKA was not a cost-effective procedure compared to mTKA. However, when results were extrapolated out to a ten-year time horizon, which would need to be confirmed in future research, rTKA was likely to be cost-effective.

Identifiers

PMID40480644
PMCPMC12143939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.