Estimating the Costs, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Revision Risk in the Year After Elective Primary and Revision Hip Arthroplasty Procedures by Implant Bearing Materials: An Analysis of Linked Data From the National Joint Registry (Njr), Hospital Episode Statistics (Hes), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (Proms) for English Patients

Implants in total hip replacement (THR) are associated with different clinical and cost-effectiveness profiles,. We estimate the costs and outcomes for NHS patients in the year after THR associated with implant bearing materials using linked routinely collected data. We linked NJR primary elective THR patients for osteoarthritis to HES and National PROMs. We estimated health care costs, health-related quality of life indices, and revision risks, in the year after primary and revision THRs overall. We used generalised linear models adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics and estimated 10-year cumulative probability of revision. We imputed utilities using chained equations for half the sample with missing PROMS. We linked 577,973 elective primary THRs and 11,812 subsequent revisions. One year after primary THR, patients with the cemented THRs using cobalt chrome or stainless steel head with HCLPE liner/cup cost the NHS, on average, £13,101 (95%CI £13,080,£13,122), had an average quality-of-life score of 0.788 (95%CI 0.787,0.788), and a 10-year revision probability of 1.9% (95%CI 1.6,2.3). Compared to the reference, patients receiving a cemented THR with delta ceramic head and HCLPE liner/cup, hybrid THR with delta ceramic head and HCLPE liner/cup, and hybrid THR with alumina head and HCLPE liner/cup had lower 1-year costs (-£572 \95% CI -£775,-£385\, -£346 \-£501,-£192\, -£371 \-£574,-£168\ respectively), better quality of life (0.007 \95% CI 0.003,0.011\, 0.013 \0.010,0.016\, 0.009 \0.005,0.013\ respectively), and lower 10-year revision probabilities (1.4% \1.03,2.0\, 1.5 \1.3,1.7\, 1.6%\1.2,2.1\ respectively). Implant bearing materials are associated with varying mean costs and health outcomes after primary THR. Ours is the first study to derive costs and health outcomes from large, linked databases using multiple imputation methods to deal with bias. Our findings are useful for commissioning and procurement decisions and to inform a subsequent cost-effectiveness model with more granular detail on THR implant types.