Orfanos, G., Wainwright, T. W. and Middleton, R. G., 2024. An Economic Analysis of Metal-on-Metal Versus Ceramic-on-Ceramic Hip Resurfacing: Costs and Clinical Implications. Prosthesis, 6 (6), 1586-1590.
Full text available as:
|
PDF (OPEN ACCESS ARTICLE)
prosthesis-06-00114.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. 340kB | |
Copyright to original material in this document is with the original owner(s). Access to this content through BURO is granted on condition that you use it only for research, scholarly or other non-commercial purposes. If you wish to use it for any other purposes, you must contact BU via BURO@bournemouth.ac.uk. Any third party copyright material in this document remains the property of its respective owner(s). BU grants no licence for further use of that third party material. |
DOI: 10.3390/prosthesis6060114
Abstract
Background: Ceramic may be an alternative bearing surface that could be used to deal with the negative sequalae associated with the use of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing implants, keeping the benefits of hip resurfacing without the risks. The aim of this study is to evaluate the additional financial and logistical implications that MoM hip resurfacing has, in comparison to its ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) counterpart. Methods: Two different follow up protocols were analysed, according to current practice guidance, on how to follow up with hip resurfacing procedures. Reference costs were identified using the latest national cost collection data and data from the local biochemistry department. The results incorporated the number of hip resurfacings performed nationally. Results: The non-MoM protocol yielded a per operation lifetime follow up cost of £802.50, whereas the MoM protocol yielded a cost of £2132.83 at 25 years. Nationally, according to the 2023 data, this amounted to £561,750 versus £1,492,981 per year, respectively. MoM hip resurfacing is 2.6 times more expensive to be followed up with when compared to the standard protocol. Conclusion: The cost of the follow up of MoM bearings far exceeds that of non-MoM bearings. If CoC hip resurfacing is as clinically effective as MoM hip resurfacing, then the economics favour CoC bearing for resurfacing.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1586-1590 |
Uncontrolled Keywords: | hip replacement; hip resurfacing; metal-on-metal; ceramic-on-ceramic; health economics |
Group: | Faculty of Health & Social Sciences |
ID Code: | 40674 |
Deposited By: | Symplectic RT2 |
Deposited On: | 08 Jan 2025 11:57 |
Last Modified: | 08 Jan 2025 11:57 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Repository Staff Only - |