Cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for non-displaced osteoporotic femoral neck fractures in older adults in Ontario, Canada
| dc.contributor.author | Ruangsomboon P. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Huang Y.Q. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ruangsomboon O. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Tam D. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Zywiel M. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ravi B. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Naimark D.M.J. | |
| dc.contributor.correspondence | Ruangsomboon P. | |
| dc.contributor.other | Mahidol University | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-05-11T18:19:45Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2026-05-11T18:19:45Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2026-05-01 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Aims: This economic evaluation study assessed the cost-effectiveness of six treatment strategies for non-displaced osteoporotic femoral neck fractures (NDFNFs) in older adults using a Markov cohort model from the Ontario, Canada, public payer perspective. Methods: A probabilistic Markov chain Monte Carlo decision analysis model was developed to compare six strategies: 1) cemented femoral fixation total hip arthroplasty (THA; hybrid, cemented femoral component/uncemented cup - 'cemented THA'); 2) cementless THA; 3) cemented hip hemiarthroplasty (HHA); 4) cementless HHA; 5) internal fixation (IF); and 6) conservative treatment. The base case cohort consisted of Canadian patients presenting with a NDFNF aged 65 years, modelled with a lifetime horizon. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-months (QALMs), lifetime costs (discounted at 1.5% annually), net monetary benefits (NMBs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). All costs are presented in Canadian dollars (CAD, $). The cost-effectiveness threshold (λ) was $4,166.67 per QALM. The primary outcome measure was expected NMBs, and the preferred strategy was the one with the highest expected NMBs over the lifetime horizon. Results: The estimated mean costs were $6,054 (IF), $11,995 (cemented THA), $11,011 (cemented HHA), $11,854 (cementless HHA), $15,405 (cementless THA), and $7,617 (conservative treatment). Cemented THA yielded the highest QALMs (192.7). Cemented THA had the highest NMB ($790,784). Cementless THA, cementless HHA, and conservative treatment were absolutely dominated while cemented HHA was extendedly dominated. After excluding dominated strategies, the ICER for cemented THA compared with IF was $127.5 per QALM, indicating that cemented THA is cost-effective relative to IF. At a λ of $4,166.67 per QALM, cemented THA was the most cost-effective strategy in 48.7% of simulations, followed by cemented HHA (31.2%) and IF (17.9%). Conclusion: Cemented femoral fixation THA is the most preferred strategy (highest expected NMB at λ) for NDFNFs in 65-year-old patients. When evaluated against a λ of $4,166.67 per QALM, cemented THA outperforms cementless THA, HHA, IF, and conservative treatment. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Bone Joint Journal Vol.108-B No.5 (2026) , 688-697 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1302/0301-620X.108B5.BJJ-2025-0673.R1 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 20494408 | |
| dc.identifier.pmid | 42061878 | |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-105037708356 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/116677 | |
| dc.rights.holder | SCOPUS | |
| dc.subject | Medicine | |
| dc.title | Cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for non-displaced osteoporotic femoral neck fractures in older adults in Ontario, Canada | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| mu.datasource.scopus | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=105037708356&origin=inward | |
| oaire.citation.endPage | 697 | |
| oaire.citation.issue | 5 | |
| oaire.citation.startPage | 688 | |
| oaire.citation.title | Bone Joint Journal | |
| oaire.citation.volume | 108-B | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | University of Toronto | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | University of Manitoba | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Siriraj Hospital | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute | |
| oairecerif.author.affiliation | Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences |
