Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:32:48.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ARTHROSCOPIC SURGERY FOR KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS: IMPACT OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN GERMANY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 October 2017

Naomi Fujita-Rohwerder ,
Alric Rüther  and
Stefan Sauerland
Naomi Fujita-Rohwerder
Affiliation:
Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)naomi.fujita-rohwerder@iqwig.de
Alric Rüther
Affiliation:
Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)
Stefan Sauerland
Affiliation:
Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to describe how a negative reimbursement decision—based on the health technology assessment (HTA) report of a nondrug intervention—affects healthcare providers in Germany.

Methods: Knee arthroscopy was chosen as an example, because as of April 2016 this procedure is no longer reimbursed for osteoarthritis, but is still covered for other indications, including meniscal lesions. The exclusion followed an HTA report prepared by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG). Here, we examine how the decision to revoke reimbursement for arthroscopy was perceived by the surgical community. Information was collected from official hospital statistics, the internet, and informal interviews with orthopedic surgeons.

Results: In 2015, a total of 37,920 arthroscopic procedures were performed for knee osteoarthritis in Germany. Several surgical societies were unhappy with the negative decision, which was issued as a directive in November 2015, and they challenged the decision-making process as well as the underlying scientific evidence. In March 2016, fifteen societies issued joint recommendations on how to differentiate osteoarthritis from other knee diseases and how to document other diseases in a way that inspections by representatives of health insurance funds would not detect any deficiencies. In informal interviews, orthopedic surgeons indicated that miscoding of the principal diagnosis (meniscal tear rather than knee osteoarthritis) is to be expected, especially in the hospital sector.

Conclusions: HTA can have a significant impact on the provision of health services, but various loopholes allow physicians to undermine policy decisions. Therefore, it is important to involve all stakeholders in HTA and to convince them of the benefits of evidence-based medicine.

Keywords

Health technology assessmentArthroscopyKnee osteoarthritis
Type
Theme Submissions
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 33 , Issue 4: Mini-Theme: Stories of HTA Impact , 2017 , pp. 420 - 423
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. General Methods: Version 4.2. 2015.Google Scholar
2. Wulff, KC, Miller, FG, Pearson, SD. Can coverage be rescinded when negative trial results threaten a popular procedure? The ongoing saga of vertebroplasty. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30:2269–2276.Google Scholar
3. Hamilton, DF, Howie, CR. Knee arthroscopy: Influence of systems for delivering healthcare on procedure rates. BMJ. 2015;351:h4720.Google Scholar
4. Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care. Arthroscopy of the knee joint for gonarthrosis: Executive Summary; Report N11-01. IQWiG-Berichte.Google Scholar
5. Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen. Arthroskopie des Kniegelenks bei Gonarthrose: Abschlussbericht; Auftrag N11-01. IQWiG-Berichte. 211 ed. Köln: IQWiG; 2014.Google Scholar
6. Moseley, JB, O'Malley, K, Petersen, NJ, et al. A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:81–88.Google Scholar
7. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA). Richtlinie Methoden vertragsärztliche Versorgung: Arthroskopie des Kniegelenks bei Gonarthrose [Directive on ambulatory care method: Arthroscopy of the knee in gonarthrosis]. 2015.Google Scholar
8. Müller-Rath, R. Arthroskopie bei Gonarthrose – keine Diskussion mit uns Ärzten [Arthroscopy for gonarthrosis - no discussion with us, the doctors]. Arthroskopie. 2015;28:338–339.Google Scholar
9. Gesellschaft für Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie, Arbeitsgemeinschaft Niedergelassener Chirurgen, Genossenschaft Niedergelassener Chirurgen Nordrhein, et al. Arthroskopie bei Gonarthrose - Eine Handlungsempfehlung für Ärztinnen und Ärzte [Arthroscopy for knee osteoarthritis - recommendations for physicans]. 2016.Google Scholar
10. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Arthroscopic knee washout, with or without debridement, for the treatment of osteoarthritis: Interventional procedures guidance [IPG230]. 2007.Google Scholar
11. Thorlund, JB, Juhl, CB, Roos, EM, Lohmander, LS. Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative knee: Systematic review and meta-analysis of benefits and harms. BMJ. 2015;350:h2747.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Khan, M, Evaniew, N, Bedi, A, Ayeni, OR, Bhandari, M. Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative tears of the meniscus: A systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2014;186:1057–1064.Google Scholar
13. Sihvonen, R, Paavola, M, Malmivaara, A, et al. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus sham surgery for a degenerative meniscal tear. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2515–2524.Google Scholar
14. van de Graaf, VA, Wolterbeek, N, Mutsaerts, EL, et al. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or conservative treatment for nonobstructive meniscal tears: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arthroscopy. 2016;32:1855–1865.Google Scholar
15. Lüngen, M, Lauterbach, KW. Upcoding - eine Gefahr für den Einsatz von Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRG)? [Upcoding–a risk for the use of diagnosis-related groups?] Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2000;125: 852–856.Google Scholar
16. Mattila, VM, Sihvonen, R, Paloneva, J, Felländer-Tsai, L. Changes in rates of arthroscopy due to degenerative knee disease and traumatic meniscal tears in Finland and Sweden. Acta Orthop. 2016;87:5–11.Google Scholar
17. Kim, S, Bosque, J, Meehan, JP, Jamali, A, Marder, R. Increase in outpatient knee arthroscopy in the United States: A comparison of National Surveys of Ambulatory Surgery, 1996 and 2006. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:994–1000.Google Scholar
18. Busse, R, Nimptsch, U, Mansky, T. Measuring, monitoring, and managing quality in Germany's hospitals. Health Aff (Millwood). 2009;28: w294–w304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed