AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1.2 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Review | Open Access

A systematic review on the cost‐effectiveness of the computer‐assisted orthopedic system

Hua Li1Tengfeng Zhuang1Wenrui Wu1Wenyi Gan1Chongjie Wu1Sijun Peng1Songwei Huan1( )Ning Liu1 ( )
Department of Orthopaedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Computer‐assisted orthopedic system (CAOS) is rapidly gaining popularity in the field of precision medicine. However, the cost‐effectiveness of CAOS has not been well clarified. We performed this review to summarize and assess the cost‐effectiveness analyses (CEAs) with regard to CAOS. Publications on CEA in CAOS have been searched in PubMed and CEA Registry up to May 31, 2022. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used to estimate the quality of studies. Relationships between qualities and potential factors were also examined. There were 15 eligible studies in the present review. Twelve studies evaluated CAOS joint arthroplasties and found that CAOS joint arthroplasties were cost‐effective compared to manual methods. Three studies focused on spinal surgery, two of which analyzed the cost‐effectiveness of CAOS for patients after spinal fusion, with conflicting results. One study demonstrated that CAOS was cost‐effective in spinal pedicle screw insertion. The mean QHES score of CEAs included was 86.1. The potential factors had no significant relationship with the quality of studies. Based on available studies, our review reflected that CAOS was cost‐effective in the field of joint arthroplasty. While in spinal surgery, the answer was unclear. Current CEAs represent high qualities, and more CEAs are required in the different disciplines of orthopedics where CAOS is employed.

Graphical Abstract

References

【1】
【1】
 
 
Health Care Science
Pages 173-185

{{item.num}}

Comments on this article

Go to comment

< Back to all reports

Review Status: {{reviewData.commendedNum}} Commended , {{reviewData.revisionRequiredNum}} Revision Required , {{reviewData.notCommendedNum}} Not Commended Under Peer Review

Review Comment

Close
Close
Cite this article:
Li H, Zhuang T, Wu W, et al. A systematic review on the cost‐effectiveness of the computer‐assisted orthopedic system. Health Care Science, 2022, 1(3): 173-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/hcs2.23

2022

Views

116

Downloads

6

Crossref

2

Web of Science

3

Scopus

Received: 11 July 2022
Accepted: 14 September 2022
Published: 02 November 2022
© 2022 The Authors.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.