ArticleBMJ open2025
Use of total knee arthroplasty by type of public insurance scheme: a cross-sectional study based on claims data in Thailand.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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.
- Characteristics of hospitalization patterns and expenditures in cross-border medical tourism: a knee replacement surgery cohort study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLife expectancy is increasing in many middle-income countries (MIC). Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can promote independent living among older people with osteoarthritis. In Thailand, healthcare costs for employed and retired civil servants and their parents are covered by the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme (CSMBS), and the Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS) protects older people not covered by other public schemes. We investigated the extent to which use of TKA varied by insurance scheme.
designA retrospective cross-sectional study.
settingWe used national-level inpatient claims data from CSMBS and UCS between 1 Jan 2018 and 31 Dec 2020.
participantsWe included patients aged >50 with primary osteoarthritis who underwent TKA. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A Poisson regression model was used to estimate procedure rates per 100 000 insured people per year by an insurance scheme. In patients who underwent TKA, we used a generalised linear model to estimate absolute differences (AD) by the insurance scheme in the use of mobile-bearing implants and simultaneous BTKA. We report estimated average TKA rates, adjusted for age, sex, calendar year and health region, if all patients would have been insured either by CSMBS or UCS.
resultsOf the 39 198 patients undergoing TKA, 13 814 were insured by CSMBS (35.2%) and 25 384 by UCS (64.8%). The adjusted estimated TKA rate per 100 000 insured people per year for CSMBS was 149.3 (95% CI 146.8-151.8) and for UCS 59.3 (58.5-60.0), resulting in a rate ratio of 2.52 (2.47-2.57, p<0.0001). Among patients undergoing TKA, 8.7% of CSMBS-insured patients and 8.6% of UCS-insured patients received mobile-bearing implants while 6.0% and 3.6%, respectively, received simultaneous BTKA (adjusted ADs for mobile-bearing implants 0.7% (-2.4, 3.9), p=0.6445 and for simultaneous BTKA 2.7% (-0.3, 5.8), p=0.0811).
conclusionsThe substantial difference between TKA rates of the two insurance schemes clearly demands policy attention. Further investigations should clarify whether the different rates reflect appropriate use. We recommend other countries experiencing rapid population ageing to explore how well healthcare systems are responding to the changing needs of their older populations.
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.