Does a Reduced Secondary Operation Rate Offset Higher Implant Charges when Utilizing Suture Button Fixation for Syndesmotic Injuries?

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1097/BOT.0000000000002476
Christopher D Flanagan, Eric Solomon, Joseph Michalski, Thomas S Stang, Derek S Stenquist, David Donohue, Anjan Shah, Benjamin Maxson, David Watson, George Ochenjele, Hassan R Mir
{"title":"Does a Reduced Secondary Operation Rate Offset Higher Implant Charges when Utilizing Suture Button Fixation for Syndesmotic Injuries?","authors":"Christopher D Flanagan,&nbsp;Eric Solomon,&nbsp;Joseph Michalski,&nbsp;Thomas S Stang,&nbsp;Derek S Stenquist,&nbsp;David Donohue,&nbsp;Anjan Shah,&nbsp;Benjamin Maxson,&nbsp;David Watson,&nbsp;George Ochenjele,&nbsp;Hassan R Mir","doi":"10.1097/BOT.0000000000002476","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine whether a reduced secondary operation rate offsets higher implant charges when using suture button fixation for syndesmotic injuries.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Single, urban, Level 1 trauma center.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Three-hundred twenty-seven (N = 327) skeletally mature patients with rotational ankle fractures (OTA/AO type 44) necessitating concurrent syndesmotic fixation.</p><p><strong>Intervention: </strong>Suture button or solid 3.5-mm screw syndesmotic fixation.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measurements: </strong>To compare implant charges with secondary operation charges based on differential implant removal rates between screws and suture buttons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients undergoing screw fixation were older (48.8 vs. 39.6 years, P < 0.01), had more ground-level fall mechanisms (59.3% vs. 51.1%, P = 0.026), and sustained fewer 44C type injuries (34.7% vs. 56.8%, P = 0.01). Implant removal occurred at a higher rate in the screw fixation group (17.6% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.005). Binomial logistic regression identified nonsmoker status (B = 1.03, P = 0.04) and implant type (B = 1.41, P = 0.008) as factors associated with implant removal. Adjusting for age, the NNT with a suture button construct to prevent one implant removal operation was 9, with mean resulting additional implant charges of $9747 ($1083/case). Backward calculations using data from previous large studies estimated secondary operation charges at approximately $14220, suggesting a potential 31.5% cost savings for suture buttons when considering reduced secondary operation rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A reduced secondary operation rate may offset increased implant charges for suture button syndesmotic fixation when considering institutional implant removal rates for operations occurring in tertiary care settings. Given these offsetting charges, surgeons should use the syndesmotic fixation strategy they deem most appropriate in their practice setting.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":16644,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000002476","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether a reduced secondary operation rate offsets higher implant charges when using suture button fixation for syndesmotic injuries.

Design: Retrospective cohort study.

Setting: Single, urban, Level 1 trauma center.

Participants: Three-hundred twenty-seven (N = 327) skeletally mature patients with rotational ankle fractures (OTA/AO type 44) necessitating concurrent syndesmotic fixation.

Intervention: Suture button or solid 3.5-mm screw syndesmotic fixation.

Main outcome measurements: To compare implant charges with secondary operation charges based on differential implant removal rates between screws and suture buttons.

Results: Patients undergoing screw fixation were older (48.8 vs. 39.6 years, P < 0.01), had more ground-level fall mechanisms (59.3% vs. 51.1%, P = 0.026), and sustained fewer 44C type injuries (34.7% vs. 56.8%, P = 0.01). Implant removal occurred at a higher rate in the screw fixation group (17.6% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.005). Binomial logistic regression identified nonsmoker status (B = 1.03, P = 0.04) and implant type (B = 1.41, P = 0.008) as factors associated with implant removal. Adjusting for age, the NNT with a suture button construct to prevent one implant removal operation was 9, with mean resulting additional implant charges of $9747 ($1083/case). Backward calculations using data from previous large studies estimated secondary operation charges at approximately $14220, suggesting a potential 31.5% cost savings for suture buttons when considering reduced secondary operation rates.

Conclusions: A reduced secondary operation rate may offset increased implant charges for suture button syndesmotic fixation when considering institutional implant removal rates for operations occurring in tertiary care settings. Given these offsetting charges, surgeons should use the syndesmotic fixation strategy they deem most appropriate in their practice setting.

Level of evidence: Economic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
缝线扣固定治疗韧带联合损伤时,二次手术率降低是否抵消了较高的植入费用?
目的:探讨缝合扣固定治疗韧带联合损伤时,降低二次手术率是否能抵消较高的植入物费用。设计:回顾性队列研究。环境:单一,城市,一级创伤中心。参与者:327例(N = 327)骨性成熟的踝关节旋转骨折患者(OTA/AO型44)需要同时进行关节联合固定。干预:缝合扣或实心3.5 mm螺钉联合固定。主要结果测量:比较基于螺钉和缝合扣的不同种植体移除率的种植体费用和二次手术费用。结果:采用螺钉固定的患者年龄较大(48.8岁对39.6岁,P < 0.01),地面坠落机制较多(59.3%对51.1%,P = 0.026), 44C型损伤较少(34.7%对56.8%,P = 0.01)。螺钉固定组内种植体脱位率较高(17.6% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.005)。二项logistic回归发现不吸烟者(B = 1.03, P = 0.04)和种植体类型(B = 1.41, P = 0.008)是种植体移除的相关因素。调整年龄后,采用缝合扣结构防止一次种植体移除手术的NNT为9,平均导致额外种植体费用为9747美元(1083美元/例)。根据之前大型研究的数据进行逆向计算,估计二次手术费用约为14220美元,考虑到二次手术率的降低,缝合按钮可能节省31.5%的成本。结论:考虑到三级医疗机构中手术的机构植入物移除率,降低的二次手术率可以抵消缝合扣韧带联合固定增加的植入物费用。考虑到这些抵消费用,外科医生应该在他们的实践环境中使用他们认为最合适的联合固定策略。证据等级:经济四级。参见《作者说明》获得证据等级的完整描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 医学-运动科学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
396
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma is devoted exclusively to the diagnosis and management of hard and soft tissue trauma, including injuries to bone, muscle, ligament, and tendons, as well as spinal cord injuries. Under the guidance of a distinguished international board of editors, the journal provides the most current information on diagnostic techniques, new and improved surgical instruments and procedures, surgical implants and prosthetic devices, bioplastics and biometals; and physical therapy and rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Postoperative Care and Outcomes in Solid-Organ Transplant Patients Undergoing Lower Extremity Fracture Treatment. Does Scheduled Low-Dose Short-Term NSAID (Ketorolac) Modulate Cytokine Levels After Orthopaedic Polytrauma? A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial. Preoperative Fascia Iliaca Blocks Associated With Decreased Opioid Consumption in Femoral Shaft and Distal Femur Fractures. Dorsal Hook Plating of Patella Fractures With Immediate Range of Motion Results in Reliable Fixation, Low Implant Removal Rates, and Satisfactory Clinical Outcomes. Nonoperative Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures With Immediate Functional Bracing Versus Coaptation Splinting and Delayed Functional Bracing: A Retrospective Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1