4.6 Article

Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Time-Driven Activity-Based Cost Analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY
Volume 37, Issue 6, Pages 1023-1028

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE INC MEDICAL PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.02.029

Keywords

unicompartmental; knee arthroplasty; robotic; cost; economic; time-driven activity-based costing

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared the facility costs of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RA-UKA) and conventional unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) using time-driven activity-based costing. The results showed that, despite the longer operative time, RA-UKA had lower overall facility costs.
Background: The cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (RA-UKA) remains unclear. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) has been shown to accurately reflect true resource utilization. This study aimed to compare true facility costs between RA-UKA and conventional UKA. Methods: We identified 265 consecutive UKAs (133 RA, 132 conventional) performed at a specialty hospital in 2016-2020. Itemized facility costs were calculated using TDABC. Separate analyses including and excluding implant costs were performed. Multiple regression was performed to determine the independent effect of robotic assistance on facility costs. Results: Due to longer operative time, RA-UKA patients had higher personnel costs and total facility costs ($2,270 vs $1,854, P < .001). Controlling for demographics and comorbidities, robotic assistance was associated with an increase in personnel costs of $399.25 (95% confidence interval [CI] $343.75-$454.74, P < .001), reduction in supply costs of $55.03 (95% CI $0.56-$109.50, P 1/4 .048), and increase in total facility costs of $344.27 (95% CI $265.24-$423.31, P < .001) per case. However, after factoring in implant costs, robotic assistance was associated with a reduction in total facility costs of $235.87 (95% CI $40.88$430.85, P < .001) per case. Conclusion: Using TDABC, overall facility costs were lower in RA-UKA despite a longer operative time. To facilitate wider adoption of this technology, implant manufacturers may negotiate lower implant costs based on volume commitments when robotic assistance is used. These supply cost savings appear to offset a portion of the increased costs. Nonetheless, further research is needed to determine if RA-UKA can improve clinical outcomes and create value in arthroplasty. (c) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available