Search

Summary Given the dramatic increase in the number of total knee replacement (TKR) surgeries in developed countries, the issue of the best time for surgery needs to be addressed from an economic perspective. Objective To assess, from the perspective of the healthcare payer, the cost-utility of two surgical strategies in which knee replacement is performed at the early or late stage of the disease in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Design Patient data and evidence from published literature on economic costs and outcomes in OA, including utilities, non-pharmacological, pharmacological and surgical options, combined with population life tables were entered in a Markov model of OA. The model represented the lifetime experience of a cohort of patients following their therapeutic management, discounting costs (euros) and utilities (quality-adjusted life-years) at 4% annually. Results In the base-case scenario, early TKR cost €6,624 more than late TKR (€76,223 vs €69,599) with a 0.15 gain in QALYs (18.675 vs 18.524). This yielded an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of 43,631 €/QALY. Sensitivity analyses of the most influential uncertain parameters were performed and did not modify the direction of the conclusions: early TKR cost between €3,655 and €7,194 more than late TKR with a gain in QALYs between 0.15 and 0.39. The ICUR ranged from 17,131 €/QALY to 48,241 €/QALY. Conclusion Our data do not support the early TKR strategy over the late TKR strategy in knee OA patients from a medico-economic perspective.

International audience; ObjectiveAn overview of the economic consequences – overall costs as well as cost breakdown (direct and indirect) – of hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA) worldwide.MethodsA systematic literature search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases for articles was performed independently by two rheumatologists who used the same predefined eligible criteria. Papers without abstracts and in languages other than English or French were excluded. Extracted costs were converted to an annual cost and to 2013 euros (€) by using the Consumer Price Index of the relevant countries and the 2013 Purchasing Power Parities between these countries and the European Union average.ResultsA total of 45 abstracts were selected, and 32 articles were considered for the review. The studied populations were heterogeneous: administrative, hospital and national health survey data. Annual total costs per patient ranged from 0.7 to 12 k€, direct costs per patient from 0.5 to 10.9 k€ and indirect costs per patient from 0.2 to 12.3 k€. The weighted average annual costs per patient living with knee and hip OA were 11.1, 9.5 and 4.4 k€ for total, direct and indirect costs, respectively.ConclusionsThis review highlights the heterogeneity of studies and lack of methodologic consensus to obtain reliable cost-of-illness estimates for lower-limb OA. However, costs induced by the disease seem substantial and deserve to be more extensively explored.

Purpose: The computerized Animated Activity Questionnaire (AAQ) for assessing activity limitations in hip and knee osteoarthritis (HKOA) consists of video animations from which patients can choose the animation that best matches their own performance. The AAQ has demonstrated good validity and reliability. Application of the AAQ in international studies, requires good cross-cultural validity, i.e., minimal Differential Item Functioning (DIF) across countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate cross-cultural validity. Methods: Patients in 7 European countries patients completed the AAQ on a computer. Ordinal logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate DIF across languages (Dutch versus 6 other languages). DIF is defined as follows: If a patient in a country has the same level of activity limitation as a patient in the Netherlands (the reference country in which the AAQ is developed), they should score the same on each item of the AAQ. If there is a statistical significant difference between countries, there is DIF. We used frequently described criteria in literature to assess DIF between countries. Criteria for non-uniform DIF were set as a statistical significance (p

Udgivelsesdato: Apr OBJECTIVE: To translate and adapt the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) into French and to evaluate the psychometric properties of this new version, by testing feasibility, internal consistency, construct validity, reliability and responsiveness, in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: The French version of the HOOS was developed according to published international guidelines to ensure content validity. The new version was then evaluated in two symptomatic hip OA populations, one with no indication for joint replacement (medical group), and the other waiting for total hip replacement (THR) (surgery group). The psychometric properties assessed were feasibility: percentage of responses, floor and ceiling effects; internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha; construct validity by evaluating correlations with the Lequesne's index and the visual analogic scale (VAS) for pain (Pearson's correlation coefficient); reliability: intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland et Altman representation; responsiveness by comparing the results of before and 1 month after injection of hyaluronic acid (medical group) and by comparing the pre and 3 months post THR results (surgery group) by calculating standardized response mean (SRM) and effect size (ES). RESULTS: A total of 88 patients were recruited; 58 in the medicine group (mean age=61.8+/-9 years, range 42-81, 70% women) and 30 in the surgery group (mean age=67.5+/-9 years, range 50-81, 68% women). The percentage of item responses was excellent (99%). Neither a floor nor a ceiling effect was observed, except for a ceiling effect (17.8% of patients with worst possible score) observed prior to surgery in the sport and recreation subscale. The internal consistency was good for four of the five HOOS subscales. As expected, the strongest correlations were observed between all HOOS subscales and Lequesne's index or VAS pain, indicating good construct validity. The reliability was good, with an ICC>0.8 for all subscales. The responsiveness was good for all domains 1 month after hyaluronic acid injection (ES ranging from 0.73 to 1.86 and SRM from 0.51 to 1.04) and high for all domains 3 months after THR (ES ranging from 1.47 to 2.08 and SRM ranging from 1.97 to 3.24). CONCLUSION: The French version of HOOS demonstrated good psychometric properties and appears to be useful for the evaluation of patient-relevant outcome whatever the severity of hip OA. This study provides a basis for the use of this French version of the HOOS in future clinical trials.

Summary Objective Current guidelines recommend using both a generic and a specific instrument to measure quality of life (QoL) among people with chronic diseases. However, the two questionnaires may not be independent, which raises the issue of whether the order in which they are completed influences their value. We aimed to assess the effect of order of presentation of a generic (SF36) and a specific (Osteoarthritis Knee and Hip QoL [OAKHQOL]) QoL instrument administered to patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA). Methods We recruited 341 outpatients from rheumatology and orthopaedic surgery clinics. Demographic and clinical data and responses to the SF36 and OAKHQOL self-administered questionnaires were collected at baseline and 10 days after inclusion; surgical patients were also assessed 6 months post-surgery. The order of presentation of the instruments was randomized at inclusion. Results The order of instrument presentation had no significant effect on response rate, number of dimensions with a floor or a ceiling effect, or questionnaire scores. In one of 13 dimensions (social support dimension of the OAKHQOL), test–retest reliability was slightly better when the generic SF36 questionnaire was presented first (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.84 vs 0.55). The analysis of sensitivity to change and discriminant ability did not favour one group over the other. Conclusion The order of presentation of a generic and a specific QoL questionnaire to patients with OA had an only marginal effect on the quality of responses and the QoL scores obtained.

Udgivelsesdato: 2008-Apr OBJECTIVE: To adapt the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) into French and to evaluate the psychometric properties of this new version. METHODS: The French version of the KOOS was developed according to cross-cultural guidelines by using the "translation-back translation" method to ensure content validity. KOOS data were then obtained in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA). The translated questionnaire was evaluated in two knee OA population groups, one with no indication for joint replacement (medicine), and the other waiting for joint replacement (surgery). The psychometric properties evaluated were feasibility: percentage of responses, floor and ceiling effects; construct validity: internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, correlations with osteoarthritis knee and hip quality of life domains using Spearman's rank test, and known group comparison between medicine and surgery groups; reliability: intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland and Altman representation; responsiveness using data obtained prior to and 3 months after surgery: standardized response mean (SRM), and effect size. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were included in the medicine group (68% women, mean age=70+/-10 years) and 30 in the surgery group (73% women, mean age=71+/-10 years). The percentage of responses was excellent. Neither a floor nor a ceiling effect was observed, except for the sport and recreation subscale (20.6% of patients with the worst possible score in the medicine group, 40 and 0% in the surgery group prior to and after surgery, respectively). Results for internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.76 to 0.93), and convergent and divergent construct validity were satisfactory. The patients waiting for knee surgery presented with significantly lower scores in all KOOS domains. The reproducibility of measurements of all KOOS subscales was good to excellent, with ICC ranging from 0.755 to 0.914. The responsiveness was high, with SRM ranging from 0.89 to 1.93, and effect size from 1.31 to 2.8. CONCLUSION: The French version of KOOS is a valid, reliable, and responsive instrument to capture specific aspects of functional disability affecting quality of life of knee OA patients.