Author:
Deviandri Romy,van der Veen Hugo C.,Purba Abdul Khairul R.,Icanervilia Ajeng V.,Lubis Andri MT.,van den Akker-Scheek Inge,Postma Maarten J.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The ideal approach for treating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is still disputed. This study aimed to determine the more cost-effective strategy by comparing early ACL reconstruction (ACLR) surgery to conservative treatment (rehabilitation with optional delayed reconstruction) for ACL injury in a lower/middle-income country (LMIC), Indonesia.
Methods
A decision tree model was constructed for cost-utility analysis of early ACLR versus conservative treatment. The transition probabilities between states were obtained from the literature review. Utilities were measured by the EQ-5D-3 L from a prospective cohort study in a local hospital. The costs were obtained from a previous study that elaborated on the burden and cost of ACLR in Indonesia. Effectiveness was expressed in quality-adjusted life years gained (QALYs). Principal outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Willingness-to-pay was set at US$12,876 — three times the Indonesian GDP per capita in 2021 — the currently accepted standard in Indonesia as suggested by the World Health Organization Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective criterion (WHO-CHOICE).
Results
The early ACLR group showed an incremental gain of 0.05 QALYs over the conservative treatment group, with a higher overall cost to society of US$976. The ICER of ACLR surgery was US$19,524 per QALY, above the WTP threshold of US$12,876. The ICER was sensitive to cost of conservative treatment, cost of ACLR, and rate of cross-over to delayed ACLR numbers in the conservative treatment group. Using the WTP threshold of US$12,876, the probability of conservative treatment being preferred over early ACLR was 64%.
Conclusions
Based on the current model, early ACLR surgery does not seem more cost-effective compared to conservative treatment for ACL injury patients in Indonesia. Because the result was sensitive to the rate of cross-over probabilities from the conservative treatment alone to delayed ACLR, a future study with a long-term perspective is needed to further elucidate its impact.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference31 articles.
1. Moses B, Orchard J, Orchard J, Systematic Review. Annual Incidence of ACL Injury and surgery in various populations. Res Sports Med. 2012;20(3–4):157–79.
2. Central Bureau of Statistics of Indonesia. Portrait of the 2020 population census towards one Indonesian population data (Potret Sensus Penduduk 2020 Menuju Satu Data Kependudukan Indonesia). Published online 2021. https://www.bps.go.id/publication.html
3. Wright RW, Bogunovic L. Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction-the Multicenter Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Study. Second Edi. Elsevier; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-38962-4.00091-6
4. Deviandri R, van der Veen HC, Lubis AMT, Postma MJ, van den Akker-Scheek I, Translation. Cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Indonesian Version of the IKDC subjective knee form. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(9):23259671211038372. https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671211038372
5. Frobell RB, Roos HP, Roos EM, Roemer FW, Ranstam J, Lohmander LS. Treatment for acute anterior cruciate ligament tear: five-year outcome of a randomized trial. BMJ. 2013;346(jan24 1):f232–232. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.f232