Cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement vs fusion for the treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease

Jared D. Ament, Zhuo Yang, Pierce Nunley, Marcus B. Stone, Kee D Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

28 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF.

RESULTS A strong correlation (R2 = 0.6864; P < .001) was found by projecting a visual analog scale onto the Neck Disability Index. Cervical total disc replacement had an average of 1.58 QALYs after 24 months compared with 1.50 QALYs for ACDF recipients. Cervical total disc replacement was associated with $2139 greater average cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF was $24 594 per QALY at 2 years. Despite varying input parameters in the sensitivity analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio value stays below the threshold of $50 000 per QALY in most scenarios (range, -$58 194 to $147 862 per QALY).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with traditional ACDF is lower than the commonly accepted threshold of $50 000 per QALY. This remains true with varying input parameters in a robust sensitivity analysis, reaffirming the stability of the model and the sustainability of this intervention.

IMPORTANCE Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) was developed to treat cervical spondylosis, while preserving motion. While anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the standard of care for 2-level disease, a randomized clinical trial (RCT) suggested similar outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of this intervention has never been elucidated.

OBJECTIVE To determine the cost-effectiveness of CTDR compared with ACDF.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Datawere derived from an RCT that followed up 330 patients over 24 months. The original RCT consisted of multi-institutional data including private and academic institutions. Using linear regression for the current study, health states were constructed based on the stratification of the Neck Disability Index and a visual analog scale. Data from the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaires were transformed into utilities values using the SF-6D mapping algorithm. Costs were calculated by extracting Diagnosis-Related Group codes from institutional billing data and then applying 2012 Medicare reimbursement rates. The costs of complications and return-to-work data were also calculated. A Markov model was built to evaluate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for both treatment groups. The model adopted a third-party payer perspective and applied a 3% annual discount rate. Patients included in the original RCT had to be diagnosed as having radiculopathy ormyeloradiculopathy at 2 contiguous levels from C3-C7 that was unresponsive to conservative treatment for at least 6 weeks or demonstrated progressive symptoms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1231-1239
Number of pages9
JournalJAMA Surgery
Volume149
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2014

Fingerprint

Total Disc Replacement
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Diskectomy
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Visual Analog Scale
Costs and Cost Analysis
Therapeutics
Neck
Health Insurance Reimbursement
Spondylosis
Radiculopathy
Return to Work
Diagnosis-Related Groups
Standard of Care
Medicare
Health Surveys
Linear Models
Health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement vs fusion for the treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease. / Ament, Jared D.; Yang, Zhuo; Nunley, Pierce; Stone, Marcus B.; Kim, Kee D.

In: JAMA Surgery, Vol. 149, No. 12, 01.12.2014, p. 1231-1239.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ament, Jared D. ; Yang, Zhuo ; Nunley, Pierce ; Stone, Marcus B. ; Kim, Kee D. / Cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement vs fusion for the treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease. In: JAMA Surgery. 2014 ; Vol. 149, No. 12. pp. 1231-1239.
@article{528aeff171444e82a0f64276d66796e1,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement vs fusion for the treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease",
abstract = "MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF.RESULTS A strong correlation (R2 = 0.6864; P < .001) was found by projecting a visual analog scale onto the Neck Disability Index. Cervical total disc replacement had an average of 1.58 QALYs after 24 months compared with 1.50 QALYs for ACDF recipients. Cervical total disc replacement was associated with $2139 greater average cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF was $24 594 per QALY at 2 years. Despite varying input parameters in the sensitivity analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio value stays below the threshold of $50 000 per QALY in most scenarios (range, -$58 194 to $147 862 per QALY).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with traditional ACDF is lower than the commonly accepted threshold of $50 000 per QALY. This remains true with varying input parameters in a robust sensitivity analysis, reaffirming the stability of the model and the sustainability of this intervention.IMPORTANCE Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) was developed to treat cervical spondylosis, while preserving motion. While anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the standard of care for 2-level disease, a randomized clinical trial (RCT) suggested similar outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of this intervention has never been elucidated.OBJECTIVE To determine the cost-effectiveness of CTDR compared with ACDF.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Datawere derived from an RCT that followed up 330 patients over 24 months. The original RCT consisted of multi-institutional data including private and academic institutions. Using linear regression for the current study, health states were constructed based on the stratification of the Neck Disability Index and a visual analog scale. Data from the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaires were transformed into utilities values using the SF-6D mapping algorithm. Costs were calculated by extracting Diagnosis-Related Group codes from institutional billing data and then applying 2012 Medicare reimbursement rates. The costs of complications and return-to-work data were also calculated. A Markov model was built to evaluate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for both treatment groups. The model adopted a third-party payer perspective and applied a 3{\%} annual discount rate. Patients included in the original RCT had to be diagnosed as having radiculopathy ormyeloradiculopathy at 2 contiguous levels from C3-C7 that was unresponsive to conservative treatment for at least 6 weeks or demonstrated progressive symptoms.",
author = "Ament, {Jared D.} and Zhuo Yang and Pierce Nunley and Stone, {Marcus B.} and Kim, {Kee D}",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1001/jamasurg.2014.716",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "149",
pages = "1231--1239",
journal = "JAMA Surgery",
issn = "2168-6254",
publisher = "American Medical Association",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of cervical total disc replacement vs fusion for the treatment of 2-level symptomatic degenerative disc disease

AU - Ament, Jared D.

AU - Yang, Zhuo

AU - Nunley, Pierce

AU - Stone, Marcus B.

AU - Kim, Kee D

PY - 2014/12/1

Y1 - 2014/12/1

N2 - MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF.RESULTS A strong correlation (R2 = 0.6864; P < .001) was found by projecting a visual analog scale onto the Neck Disability Index. Cervical total disc replacement had an average of 1.58 QALYs after 24 months compared with 1.50 QALYs for ACDF recipients. Cervical total disc replacement was associated with $2139 greater average cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF was $24 594 per QALY at 2 years. Despite varying input parameters in the sensitivity analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio value stays below the threshold of $50 000 per QALY in most scenarios (range, -$58 194 to $147 862 per QALY).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with traditional ACDF is lower than the commonly accepted threshold of $50 000 per QALY. This remains true with varying input parameters in a robust sensitivity analysis, reaffirming the stability of the model and the sustainability of this intervention.IMPORTANCE Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) was developed to treat cervical spondylosis, while preserving motion. While anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the standard of care for 2-level disease, a randomized clinical trial (RCT) suggested similar outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of this intervention has never been elucidated.OBJECTIVE To determine the cost-effectiveness of CTDR compared with ACDF.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Datawere derived from an RCT that followed up 330 patients over 24 months. The original RCT consisted of multi-institutional data including private and academic institutions. Using linear regression for the current study, health states were constructed based on the stratification of the Neck Disability Index and a visual analog scale. Data from the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaires were transformed into utilities values using the SF-6D mapping algorithm. Costs were calculated by extracting Diagnosis-Related Group codes from institutional billing data and then applying 2012 Medicare reimbursement rates. The costs of complications and return-to-work data were also calculated. A Markov model was built to evaluate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for both treatment groups. The model adopted a third-party payer perspective and applied a 3% annual discount rate. Patients included in the original RCT had to be diagnosed as having radiculopathy ormyeloradiculopathy at 2 contiguous levels from C3-C7 that was unresponsive to conservative treatment for at least 6 weeks or demonstrated progressive symptoms.

AB - MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF.RESULTS A strong correlation (R2 = 0.6864; P < .001) was found by projecting a visual analog scale onto the Neck Disability Index. Cervical total disc replacement had an average of 1.58 QALYs after 24 months compared with 1.50 QALYs for ACDF recipients. Cervical total disc replacement was associated with $2139 greater average cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with ACDF was $24 594 per QALY at 2 years. Despite varying input parameters in the sensitivity analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio value stays below the threshold of $50 000 per QALY in most scenarios (range, -$58 194 to $147 862 per QALY).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CTDR compared with traditional ACDF is lower than the commonly accepted threshold of $50 000 per QALY. This remains true with varying input parameters in a robust sensitivity analysis, reaffirming the stability of the model and the sustainability of this intervention.IMPORTANCE Cervical total disc replacement (CTDR) was developed to treat cervical spondylosis, while preserving motion. While anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has been the standard of care for 2-level disease, a randomized clinical trial (RCT) suggested similar outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of this intervention has never been elucidated.OBJECTIVE To determine the cost-effectiveness of CTDR compared with ACDF.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Datawere derived from an RCT that followed up 330 patients over 24 months. The original RCT consisted of multi-institutional data including private and academic institutions. Using linear regression for the current study, health states were constructed based on the stratification of the Neck Disability Index and a visual analog scale. Data from the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaires were transformed into utilities values using the SF-6D mapping algorithm. Costs were calculated by extracting Diagnosis-Related Group codes from institutional billing data and then applying 2012 Medicare reimbursement rates. The costs of complications and return-to-work data were also calculated. A Markov model was built to evaluate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for both treatment groups. The model adopted a third-party payer perspective and applied a 3% annual discount rate. Patients included in the original RCT had to be diagnosed as having radiculopathy ormyeloradiculopathy at 2 contiguous levels from C3-C7 that was unresponsive to conservative treatment for at least 6 weeks or demonstrated progressive symptoms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919683826&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84919683826&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.716

DO - 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.716

M3 - Article

C2 - 25321869

AN - SCOPUS:84919683826

VL - 149

SP - 1231

EP - 1239

JO - JAMA Surgery

JF - JAMA Surgery

SN - 2168-6254

IS - 12

ER -