A cost-effectiveness analysis of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared with locking plates in the management of displaced proximal humerus fractures in the elderly: the DelPhi trial

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with a locking plate for patients 65-85 years old with a displaced proximal humerus fracture.

Methods: A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside a multicenter randomized controlled trial, taking a health care perspective. A total of 124 patients with displaced proximal humerus fractures were randomized to treatment with RTSA (n = 64) or ORIF (n = 60) during a 2-year period. The outcome measure was quality-adjusted life years derived from the generic questionnaire 15D in an intention to treat population. The results were expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to account for uncertainty in the analysis.

Results: At 2 years, 104 patients were eligible for analyses. The mean quality-adjusted life year was 1.24 (95% confidence interval: 1.21-1.28) in the RTSA group and 1.26 (95% confidence interval: 1.22-1.30) in the ORIF group. The mean cost in the RTSA group (€36.755 [€17,654-€55,855]) was higher than that in the ORIF group (€31.953 [€16,226-€47,279]). Using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, ORIF was the dominant treatment. When using a probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 1000 replications, the plots were centered around origo. This indicates that there is no significant difference in cost or effect.

Conclusion: In the cost-utility analysis of treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures, there were no differences between RTSA and ORIF.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness; DelPhi trial; ORIF; PHILOS; QALY; RCT; RTSA; proximal humerus fracture.