Objective:The Walk With Ease (WWE) program was developed by the Arthritis Foundation to help people with arthritis learn to exercise safely and improve arthritis symptoms. We sought to establish the value of the WWE program. Methods:We used the Osteoarthritis Policy (OAPol) Model, a widely published and validated computer simulation of knee osteoarthritis (OA), to assess the cost-effectiveness of WWE in knee OA. We derived model inputs using data from a workplace wellness initiative in Montana that offered WWE to state employees. Our primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs over a 2-year period, which we used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The base case analysis was restricted to subjects who were inactive or insufficiently active (<180 ​min/week of PA) at baseline. We performed scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to determine the impact of uncertainty in model parameters on our results. Results:In the base case analysis, adding WWE to usual care resulted in an ICER of $47,900/QALY. When the program was offered without preselection by baseline activity level, the ICER for WWE ​+ ​usual care was estimated at $83,400/QALY. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that WWE offered to inactive or insufficiently active individuals has a 52% chance of having an ICER <$50,000/QALY. Conclusion:The WWE program offers good value for inactive/insufficiently active individuals. Payers may consider including such a program to increase physical activity in individuals with knee OA.

OBJECTIVE:Class III obesity (body mass index >40 kg/m2 ) is associated with higher complications following total knee replacement (TKR), and weight loss is recommended. We aimed to establish the cost-effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and lifestyle nonsurgical weight loss (LNSWL) interventions in knee osteoarthritis patients with class III obesity considering TKR. METHODS:Using the Osteoarthritis Policy model and data from published literature to derive model inputs for RYGB, LSG, LNSWL, and TKR, we assessed the long-term clinical benefits, costs, and cost-effectiveness of weight-loss interventions for patients with class III obesity considering TKR. We assessed the following strategies with a health care sector perspective: 1) no weight loss/no TKR, 2) immediate TKR, 3) LNSWL, 4) LSG, and 5) RYGB. Each weight-loss strategy was followed by annual TKR reevaluation. Primary outcomes were cost, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), discounted at 3% per year. We conducted deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to examine the robustness of conclusions to input uncertainty. RESULTS:LSG increased QALE by 1.64 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime medical costs by $17,347 compared to no intervention, leading to an ICER of $10,600/QALY. RYGB increased QALE by 0.22 and costs by $4,607 beyond LSG, resulting in an ICER of $20,500/QALY. Relative to immediate TKR, LSG and RYGB delayed and decreased TKR utilization. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RYGB was cost-effective in 67% of iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. CONCLUSION:For patients with class III obesity considering TKR, RYGB provides good value while immediate TKR without weight loss is not economically efficient.

ObjectiveClass III obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥40 kg/m2) is associated with worse knee pain and total knee replacement (TKR) outcomes. Because bariatric surgery yields sustainable weight loss for individuals with BMI ≥40 kg/m2, our objective was to establish the value of Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in conjunction with usual care for knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients with BMI ≥40 kg/m2.MethodsWe used the Osteoarthritis Policy model to assess long‐term clinical benefits, costs, and cost‐effectiveness of RYGB and LSG. We derived model inputs for efficacy, costs, and complications associated with these treatments from published data. Primary outcomes included quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs), all discounted at 3%/year. This analysis was conducted from a health care sector perspective. We performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate uncertainty in input parameters.ResultsThe usual care + RYGB strategy increased the quality‐adjusted life expectancy by 1.35 years and lifetime costs by $7,209, compared to usual care alone (ICER = $5,300/QALY). The usual care + LSG strategy yielded less benefit than usual care + RYGB and was dominated. Relative to usual care alone, both usual care + RYGB and usual care + LSG reduced opioid use from 13% to 4%, and increased TKR usage from 30% to 50% and 41%, respectively. For cohorts with BMI between 38 and 41 kg/m2, usual care + LSG dominated usual care + RYGB. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, at a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, usual care + RYGB and usual care + LSG were cost‐effective in 70% and 30% of iterations, respectively.ConclusionRYGB offers good value among knee OA patients with BMI ≥40 kg/m2, while LSG may provide good value among those with BMI between 35 and 41 kg/m2.

Objective We examined the cost‐effectiveness of treatment strategies for concomitant meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis (OA) involving arthroscopic partial meniscectomy surgery and physical therapy (PT). Methods We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated Monte Carlo microsimulation, to compare three strategies, 1) PT‐only, 2) immediate surgery, and 3) PT + optional surgery, for participants whose pain persists following initial PT. We modeled a cohort with baseline meniscal tear, OA, and demographics from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus PT. We estimated risks and costs of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy complications and accounted for heightened OA progression post surgery using published data. We estimated surgery use rates and treatment efficacies using MeTeOR data. We considered a 5‐year time horizon, discounted costs, and quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) 3% per year and conducted sensitivity analyses. We report incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios. Results Relative to PT‐only, PT + optional surgery added 0.0651 QALY and $2,010 over 5 years (incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio = $30,900 per QALY). Relative to PT + optional surgery, immediate surgery added 0.0065 QALY and $3080 (incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio = $473,800 per QALY). Incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios were sensitive to optional surgery efficacy in the PT + optional surgery strategy. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PT + optional surgery was cost‐effective in 51% of simulations at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds of both $50,000 per QALY and $100,000 per QALY. Conclusion First‐line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy has a prohibitively high incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio. Under base case assumptions, second‐line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy offered to participants with persistent pain following initial PT is cost‐effective at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds between $31,000 and $473,000 per QALY. Our analyses suggest that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy can be a high‐value treatment option for patients with meniscal tear and OA when performed following an initial PT course and should remain a covered treatment option.

Background Early research suggests the COVID-19 pandemic worsened intimate partner violence (IPV) in the US. In particular, stay-at-home orders and social distancing kept survivors in close proximity to their abusers and restricted access to resources and care. We aimed to understand and characterize the impact of the pandemic on delivery of IPV care in Boston. Methods We conducted individual interviews with providers of IPV care and support in the Greater Boston area, including healthcare workers, social workers, lawyers, advocates, and housing specialists, who continued to work during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using thematic analysis, we identified themes describing the challenges and opportunites providers faced in caring for survivors during the pandemic. Results Analysis of 18 interviews yielded four thematic domains, encompassing 18 themes and nine sub-themes. Thematic analysis revealed that the pandemic posed an increased threat to survivors of IPV by exacerbating external stressors and leading to heightened violence. On a system level, the pandemic led to widespread uncertainty, strained resources, amplified inequities, and loss of community. On an individual level, COVID-19 restrictions limited survivors’ abilities to access resources and to be safe, and amplified pre-existing inequities, such as limited technology access. Those who did not speak English or were immigrants experienced even more difficulty accessing resources due to language and/or cultural barriers. To address these challenges, providers utilized video and telephone interactions, and stressed the importance of creativity and cooperation across different sectors of care. Conclusions While virtual care was essential in allowing providers to care for survivors, and also allowed for increased flexibility, it was not a panacea. Many survivors faced additional obstacles to care, such as language barriers, unequal access to technology, lack of childcare, and economic insecurity. Providers addressed these barriers by tailoring services and care modalities to an individual’s needs and circumstances. Going forward, some innovations of the pandemic period, such as virtual interactions and cooperation across care sectors, may be utilized in ways that attend to shifting survivor needs and access, thereby improving safe, equitable, and trauma-informed IPV care.

Background Decisions around US college and university operations will affect millions of students and faculty amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the clinical and economic value of different COVID-19 mitigation strategies on college campuses. Methods We used the Clinical and Economic Analysis of COVID-19 interventions (CEACOV) model, a dynamic microsimulation that tracks infections accrued by students and faculty, accounting for community transmissions. Outcomes include infections, $/infection-prevented, and $/quality-adjusted-life-year ($/QALY). Strategies included extensive social distancing (ESD), masks, and routine laboratory tests (RLT). We report results per 5,000 students (1,000 faculty) over one semester (105 days). Results Mitigation strategies reduced COVID-19 cases among students (faculty) from 3,746 (164) with no mitigation to 493 (28) with ESD and masks, and further to 151 (25) adding RLTq3 among asymptomatic students and faculty. ESD with masks cost $168/infection-prevented ($49,200/QALY) compared to masks alone. Adding RLTq3 ($10/test) cost $8,300/infection-prevented ($2,804,600/QALY). If tests cost $1, RLTq3 led to a favorable cost of $275/infection-prevented ($52,200/QALY). No strategies without masks were cost-effective. Conclusion Extensive social distancing with mandatory mask-wearing could prevent 87% of COVID-19 cases on college campuses and be very cost-effective. Routine laboratory testing would prevent 96% of infections and require low cost tests to be economically attractive.