Collaborative Ambulatory Orthopaedic Care in Patients with Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study on Health Utilisation and Economic Outcomes

Objective: To evaluate a novel healthcare programme for the treatment of patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis in southern Germany in terms of clinical and health economic outcomes. The study is based on claims data from 2014 to 2017. Methods: We conducted a retrospective comparative cohort study of 9768 patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis, of whom 9231 were enrolled in a collaborative ambulatory orthopaedic care programme (intervention group), and 537 patients received usual orthopaedic care (control group). Key features of the programme are coordinated care, morbidity-adapted reimbursement and extended consultation times. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine effects on health utilisation outcomes. The economic analysis considered annual costs per patient from a healthcare payer perspective, stratified by healthcare service sector. Besides multivariable regression analyses, bootstrapping was used to estimate confidence intervals for predicted mean costs by group. Results: Musculoskeletal-disease-related hospitalisation was much less likely among intervention group patients than control group patients [odds ratio (OR): 0.079; 95% CI: 0.062–0.099]. The number of physiotherapy prescriptions per patient was significantly lower in the intervention group (RR: 0.814; 95% CI: 0.721–0.919), while the likelihood of participation in exercise programmes over one year was significantly higher (OR: 3.126; 95% CI: 1.604–6.094). Enrolment in the programme was associated with significantly higher ambulatory costs (€1048 vs. €925), but costs for inpatient care, including hospital stays, were significantly lower (€1003 vs. €1497 and €928 vs. €1300 respectively). Overall annual cost-savings were €195 per patient. Conclusions: Collaborative ambulatory orthopaedic care was associated with reduced hospitalisation in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Health costs for programme participants were lower overall, despite higher costs for ambulatory care

Indication for spinal surgery: associated factors and regional differences in Germany

Background Rising surgery rates have raised questions about the indications for spinal surgery. The study investigated patient-level and regional factors associated with spinal surgery for patients with spinal diseases. Methods We undertook a cohort study based on routine healthcare data from Germany of 18.4 million patients within 60.9 million episodes of two patient-years before a possible spinal surgery in the time period 2008 to 2016. Using a Poisson model, the effects of a broad range of patient-related (sociodemographic, morbidity, social status), disease- and healthcare-related (physicians’ specialty, conservative treatments) and regional variables were analyzed. Results There was substantial regional heterogeneity in the occurrence of spinal surgery which decreased by only one quarter when controlling for the various determinants assessed. Previous musculoskeletal and mental health disorders as well as physical therapy were associated with a lower probability of surgery in the fully-adjusted model. Prescriptions for pain medication and consultations of specialists were associated with a higher probability of surgery. However, the specific severity of the vertebral diseases could not be taken into account in the analysis. Furthermore, a substantial proportion of patients with surgery did not receive a consultation with an outpatient specialist (29.5%), preoperative diagnostics (37.0%) or physical therapy (48.3%) before hospital admission. Conclusion This large study on spinal diseases in Germany highlights important patterns in medical care of spinal diseases and their association with the probability of spinal surgery. However, only a relatively small proportion of the regional heterogeneity in spinal surgery could be explained by the extensive consideration of confounders, which suggests the relevance of other unmeasured factors like physicians’ preferences