Table 1.
Extracted Data
| Topic. Year |
Author. Country |
n | Etiology | Age† | Interventions & Costs§ (Standard vs. Comparator) |
Follow-up Period | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Care Models. 2010 |
Gordon et al. Australia |
60 | 78% PVD, 22% other |
63 | Avg Labor Cost/Patient Public Sector: $1,466 Private Sector: $2,020 |
Interim to definitive fit (d): 112 vs. 119 (p =0.6)A |
Public sector patients perceived function & prosthetic satisfaction increased & labor costs 10–29% lower (p < 0.05). |
| Prosthetic Treatment. 2007‡ |
Mackenzie et al. U.S. |
384 LS; 100 TTA |
Trauma | 20– 45 y* |
TTA + Care (including prosthesis): $90,875 LS + Associated Care: $85,682 |
Hospitalization: 17.9 d (LS) vs. 17.4d (TTA)A |
TTA + care (surgery-2 y follow- up including prosthesis) $4,928 more costly vs. LS. |
| Prosthetic Treatment. 2010 |
Gil et al. U.S |
76 CF; 17 TTA |
DM + Obese + CF vs. TTA |
≈55 y | TTA + Care (including prosthesis): $147,375 LS + Associated Care: $247,589 |
1 yB | LS + care (surgery thru 1 y + hospitalizations, device provision, therapy) $97,076 more vs. TTA. |
| Prosthetic Sockets. 2004 |
Datta et al. England |
21 | 7 PVD; 10 Trauma; 4 other |
52 y | PTB socket: $477 HSD socket: $1,232 |
6 wks | PTB socket provision cost 60% less than HSD. PTB provision time 3x that of HSD. |
| Prosthetic Sockets. 2005 |
Selles et al. Netherlands |
26 | 14 PVD; 11 Trauma; 1 Cancer |
68 y; 58 y |
PTB socket: $1,045 TSB socket: $1,743 |
3 mos | PTB socket material provision cost 60% of TSB. Subjects preferred new socket regardless of type. More provision time & visits for PTB socket (p < 0.05) vs TSB. |
| Prosthetic Sockets. 2011 |
Normann et al. Sweden |
20 | 12 PVD; 7 Trauma; 1 Infection |
66 y; 69 y |
Plaster Casted Socket: $585 Direct Manufactured Socket: $858 |
17 d (Plaster); 1 d (Direct mfg) |
Direct mfg'd socket provision costs higher (p < 0.01; 32%), delivered faster (p < 0.01; 58%) & fewer visits (1 vs. 2.5) vs. plaster casting. |
§
Costs are converted to U.S. Dollars and inflated to 2015 from the publication year as outlined in the methods. Regarding time horizon, A is a 2 y horizon and B is a 40 mos horizon otherwise, time horizon was not reported.
*
age data for 72% of the sample.
†
Age(y).
‡
Mackenzie et al. used a cost-identification design whereas all others used a cost-consequence design.
CF is Charcot Foot. HSD is hydrostatic design socket. PTB is patella tendon bearing socket. TSB is total surface bearing socket. LS is limb salvage.