Search

ObjectivesTo determine the incidence of osteoarthrits (OA) in patients with atopic disease compared with matched non-exposed patients.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching using claims data from Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart (CDM) (January 2003 to June 2019) and electronic health record data from the Stanford Research Repository (STARR) (January 2010 to December 2020). We included adult patients without pre-existing OA or inflammatory arthritis who were exposed to atopic disease or who were non-exposed. The primary outcome was the development of incident OA.ResultsIn Optum CDM, we identified 117 346 exposed patients with asthma or atopic dermatitis (mean age 52 years; 60% female) and 1 247 196 non-exposed patients (mean age 50 years; 48% female). After propensity score matching (n=1 09 899 per group), OA incidence was higher in patients with asthma or atopic dermatitis (26.9 per 1000 person-years) compared with non-exposed patients (19.1 per 1000 person-years), with an adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 1.58 (95% CI 1.55 to 1.62) for developing OA. This effect was even more pronounced in patients with both asthma and atopic dermatitis compared with non-exposed patients (aOR=2.15; 95% CI 1.93 to 2.39) and in patients with asthma compared with patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (aOR=1.83; 95% CI 1.73 to 1.95). We replicated our results in an independent dataset (STARR), which provided the added richness of body mass index data. The aOR of developing OA in patients with asthma or atopic dermatitis versus non-exposed patients in STARR was 1.42 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.48).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates an increased incidence of OA in patients with atopic disease. Future interventional studies may consider targeting allergic pathways for the prevention or treatment of OA.

To quantify the total hospital costs associated with the treatment of lower extremity long-bone fracture aseptic and septic unhealed fracture, to determine if insurance adequately covers these costs, and to examine whether insurance type correlates with barriers to accessing care.Retrospective cohort study.Academic Level II trauma center.All patients undergoing operative treatment of OTA/AO classification 31, 32, 33, 41, 42, and 43 fractures between 2012 and 2020 at a single Level II trauma center with minimum of 1-year follow-up.The primary outcome was the total cost of treatment for all hospital-based episodes of care. Distance traveled from primary residence was measured as a surrogate for barriers to care.One hundred seventeen patients with uncomplicated fracture healing, 82 with aseptic unhealed fracture, and 44 with septic unhealed fracture were included in the final cohort. The median cost of treatment for treatment of septic unhealed fracture was $148,318 [interquartile range(IQR) 87,241-256,928], $45,230 (IQR 31,510-68,030) for treatment of aseptic unhealed fracture, and $33,991 (IQR 25,609-54,590) for uncomplicated fracture healing. The hospital made a profit on all patients with commercial insurance, but lost money on all patients with public insurance. Among patients with unhealed fracture, those with public insurance traveled 4 times further for their care compared with patients with commercial insurance (P = 0.004).Septic unhealed fracture of lower extremity long-bone fractures is an outsized burden on the health care system. Public insurance for both septic and aseptic unhealed fracture does not cover hospital costs. The increased distances traveled by our Medi-Cal and Medicare population may reflect the economic disincentive for local hospitals to care for publicly insured patients with unhealed fractures.Economic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Limb loss leads to significant disability. Prostheses may mitigate this disability but are not readily accessible in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Cost-effectiveness data related to prosthesis provision in resource-constrained environments such as Tanzania is greatly limited.This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a prosthesis intervention compared with that of no prosthesis for persons with transfemoral amputations in an LMIC.This is a prospective cohort study.Thirty-eight patients were prospectively followed up. Clinical improvement with prosthesis provision was measured using EuroQuol-5D, represented as quality-adjusted life years gained. Direct and indirect costs were measured. The primary outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year, measured at 1 year and projected over a lifetime using a Markov model. Reference case was set as a single prosthesis provided without replacement from a payer perspective. Additional scenarios included the societal perspective and replacement of the prosthesis. Uncertainty was measured with one-way probabilistic sensitivity analysis.From the payer perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $242 for those without prosthetic replacement over a lifetime, and the ICER was $390 for those with prosthetic replacement over a lifeime. From the societal perspective, prosthesis provision was both less expensive and more effective. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated the ICER remained below the willingness to pay threshold up to prosthesis costs of $763.These findings suggest prosthesis provision in an LMIC may be cost-effective, but further studies with long-term follow up are needed to validate the results.

While surgeons in low and middle-income countries have increasing experience with intramedullary nailing (IMN), external fixation (EF) continues to be commonly used for the management of open tibial fractures. We examined outcomes with extended follow-up of the participants enrolled in a clinical trial comparing these treatments.Adults who were ≥18 years old with acute AO/OTA type-42 open tibial shaft fractures were randomly assigned to statically locked, hand-reamed IMN or uniplanar EF. These participants were reevaluated 3 to 5 years after treatment. The primary outcome was death or reoperation for the treatment of deep infection, nonunion, or malalignment. Unresolved complications such as persistent fracture-related infection, nonunion, or malalignment were collected and analyzed. Secondary outcomes included the EuroQol-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire, the Function IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) score, radiographic alignment, and the modified Radiographic Union Scale for Tibial fractures (mRUST).Of the originally enrolled 240 participants,126 (67 managed with IMN and 59 managed with EF) died or returned for follow-up at a mean of 4.0 years (range, 2.9 to 5.2 years). Thirty-two composite primary events occurred, with rates of 23.9% and 27.1% in the IMN and EF groups, respectively. Six of these events (3 in the IMN group and 3 in the EF group) were newly detected after the original 1-year follow-up. Unresolved complications in the form of chronic fracture-related infection or nonunion were present at long-term follow-up in 25% of the participants who sustained a primary event. The EQ-5D-3L index scores were similar between the 2 groups and only returned to preinjury levels after 1 year among patients without complications or those whose complications resolved.This observational study extended follow-up for a clinical trial assessing IMN versus EF for the treatment of open tibial fractures in sub-Saharan Africa. At a mean of 4 years after injury, fracture-related infection and nonunion became chronic conditions in nearly a quarter of the participants who experienced these complications, regardless of reintervention.Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.