Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs

**Background:** The number of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) carried out globally is expected to substantially rise in the coming decades. Consequently, focus has been increasing on improving surgical techniques and minimizing expenses. Robotic arm–assisted knee arthroplasty has garnered interest t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: David J. Kolessar, Daniel S. Hayes, Jennifer L. Harding, Ravi T. Rudraraju, Jove H. Graham
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Columbia Data Analytics, LLC 2022-08-01
Series:Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.37024
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1823860263660552192
author David J. Kolessar
Daniel S. Hayes
Jennifer L. Harding
Ravi T. Rudraraju
Jove H. Graham
author_facet David J. Kolessar
Daniel S. Hayes
Jennifer L. Harding
Ravi T. Rudraraju
Jove H. Graham
author_sort David J. Kolessar
collection DOAJ
description **Background:** The number of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) carried out globally is expected to substantially rise in the coming decades. Consequently, focus has been increasing on improving surgical techniques and minimizing expenses. Robotic arm–assisted knee arthroplasty has garnered interest to reduce surgical errors and improve precision. **Objectives:** Our primary aim was to compare the episode-of-care cost up to 90 days for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and TKA performed before and after the introduction of robotic arm–assisted technology. The secondary aim was to compare the volume of UKA vs TKA. **Methods:** This was a retrospective study design at a single healthcare system. For the cost analysis, we excluded patients with bilateral knee arthroplasty, body mass index >40, postoperative infection, or noninstitutional health plan insurance. Costs were obtained through an integrated billing system and affiliated institutional insurance company. **Results:** Knee arthroplasty volume increased 28% after the introduction of robotic-assisted technology. The TKA volume increased by 17%, while the UKA volume increased 190%. Post introduction, 97% of UKA cases used robotic arm–assisted technology. The cost analysis included 178 patients (manual UKA, n = 6; robotic UKA, n = 19; manual TKA, n = 58, robotic TKA, n = 85). Robotic arm–assisted TKA and UKA were less costly in terms of patient room and operating room costs but had higher imaging, recovery room, anesthesia, and supply costs. Overall, the perioperative costs were higher for robotic UKA and TKA. Postoperative costs were lower for robotic arm–assisted surgeries, and patients used less home health and home rehabilitation. **Discussion:** Surgeons performed higher volumes of UKA, and UKA comprised a greater percentage of total surgical volume after the introduction of this technology. The selective cost analysis indicated robotic arm–assisted technology is less expensive in several cost categories but overall more expensive by up to $550 due to higher cost categories including supplies and recovery room. **Conclusions:** Our findings show a change in surgeons’ practice to include increased incidence and volume of UKA procedures and highlights several cost-saving categories through the use of robotic arm–assisted technology. Overall, robotic arm–assisted knee arthroplasty cost more than manual techniques at our institution. This analysis will help optimize costs in the future.
format Article
id doaj-art-2f45b8e3889b4b6e9e77206b8122b09e
institution Kabale University
issn 2327-2236
language English
publishDate 2022-08-01
publisher Columbia Data Analytics, LLC
record_format Article
series Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research
spelling doaj-art-2f45b8e3889b4b6e9e77206b8122b09e2025-02-10T16:13:32ZengColumbia Data Analytics, LLCJournal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research2327-22362022-08-0192Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare CostsDavid J. KolessarDaniel S. HayesJennifer L. HardingRavi T. RudrarajuJove H. Graham**Background:** The number of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) carried out globally is expected to substantially rise in the coming decades. Consequently, focus has been increasing on improving surgical techniques and minimizing expenses. Robotic arm–assisted knee arthroplasty has garnered interest to reduce surgical errors and improve precision. **Objectives:** Our primary aim was to compare the episode-of-care cost up to 90 days for unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and TKA performed before and after the introduction of robotic arm–assisted technology. The secondary aim was to compare the volume of UKA vs TKA. **Methods:** This was a retrospective study design at a single healthcare system. For the cost analysis, we excluded patients with bilateral knee arthroplasty, body mass index >40, postoperative infection, or noninstitutional health plan insurance. Costs were obtained through an integrated billing system and affiliated institutional insurance company. **Results:** Knee arthroplasty volume increased 28% after the introduction of robotic-assisted technology. The TKA volume increased by 17%, while the UKA volume increased 190%. Post introduction, 97% of UKA cases used robotic arm–assisted technology. The cost analysis included 178 patients (manual UKA, n = 6; robotic UKA, n = 19; manual TKA, n = 58, robotic TKA, n = 85). Robotic arm–assisted TKA and UKA were less costly in terms of patient room and operating room costs but had higher imaging, recovery room, anesthesia, and supply costs. Overall, the perioperative costs were higher for robotic UKA and TKA. Postoperative costs were lower for robotic arm–assisted surgeries, and patients used less home health and home rehabilitation. **Discussion:** Surgeons performed higher volumes of UKA, and UKA comprised a greater percentage of total surgical volume after the introduction of this technology. The selective cost analysis indicated robotic arm–assisted technology is less expensive in several cost categories but overall more expensive by up to $550 due to higher cost categories including supplies and recovery room. **Conclusions:** Our findings show a change in surgeons’ practice to include increased incidence and volume of UKA procedures and highlights several cost-saving categories through the use of robotic arm–assisted technology. Overall, robotic arm–assisted knee arthroplasty cost more than manual techniques at our institution. This analysis will help optimize costs in the future.https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.37024
spellingShingle David J. Kolessar
Daniel S. Hayes
Jennifer L. Harding
Ravi T. Rudraraju
Jove H. Graham
Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs
Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research
title Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs
title_full Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs
title_fullStr Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs
title_full_unstemmed Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs
title_short Robotic-Arm Assisted Technology's Impact on Knee Arthroplasty and Associated Healthcare Costs
title_sort robotic arm assisted technology s impact on knee arthroplasty and associated healthcare costs
url https://doi.org/10.36469/001c.37024
work_keys_str_mv AT davidjkolessar roboticarmassistedtechnologysimpactonkneearthroplastyandassociatedhealthcarecosts
AT danielshayes roboticarmassistedtechnologysimpactonkneearthroplastyandassociatedhealthcarecosts
AT jenniferlharding roboticarmassistedtechnologysimpactonkneearthroplastyandassociatedhealthcarecosts
AT ravitrudraraju roboticarmassistedtechnologysimpactonkneearthroplastyandassociatedhealthcarecosts
AT jovehgraham roboticarmassistedtechnologysimpactonkneearthroplastyandassociatedhealthcarecosts