Has Arthroscopic Meniscectomy Use Changed in Response to the Evidence? A Large-database Study From Spain. Issue 1 (3rd January 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: López-Vega, Marcos; Doménech-Fernández, Julio; Peiró, Salvador; Ridao-López, Manuel
• Is Part Of: Clinical orthopaedics and related research. Volume 481:Issue 1(2023)
• Page Start: 7
• Page End: 16
• Publication Date: 2023-01-03
• Subjects: Orthopedic surgery -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Research -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Research -- Periodicals; Chirurgie orthopédique -- Périodiques; 616.7005
• DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002421
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0009-921X

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Several randomized clinical trials on the treatment of meniscal tears have shown that surgery is not superior to nonoperative treatment in middle-aged and older adults. However, clinical practice has not changed consistently worldwide in response to this evidence, and arthroscopic meniscectomy remains one of the most frequently performed operations. Questions/purposes: (1) How has the use of arthroscopic meniscectomy changed in Spain between 2003 and 2018, particularly in middle-aged (35 to 59 years) and older patients (over 60 years) relative to younger patients? (2) How have surgical volumes changed across different healthcare areas in the same health system? (3) How has the proportion of outpatient versus inpatient arthroscopic procedures changed over time? Methods: Data on all 420, 228 arthroscopic meniscectomies performed in Spain between 2003 and 2018 were obtained through the Atlas of Variations in Medical Practice project (these years were chosen because data in that atlas for 2002 and 2019 were incomplete). This database has been promoted by the Spanish Health Ministry since 2002, and it collects basic information on all admissions to public and public­private partnership hospitals. The Spanish population of 2003 was used to calculate age- and sex-standardized rates of interventions per 10, 000 inhabitants and year. To assess the change in standardized rates among the age groups over the study period, a linear regression analysis was used. Standard small-area variation statistics were used to analyze variation among healthcare areas. Data on outpatient surgery and length of stay for inpatient procedures were also included. Results: The standardized rate of arthroscopic meniscectomy in Spain in 2003 was 4.8 procedures per 10, 000 population (95% CI 3.9 to 5.6), while in 2018, there were 6.3 procedures per 10, 000 population (95% CI 5.4 to 7.3), which represents an increase of 33%. Standardized rates increased slightly in the age group < 35 years (0.06 interventions per 10, 000 inhabitants per year [95% CI 0.05 to 0.08]), whereas they increased more markedly in the age groups of 35 to 59 years (0.14 interventions per 10, 000 inhabitants per year [95% CI 0.11 to 0.17]) and in those 60 years and older (0.13 interventions per 10, 000 inhabitants per year [95% CI 0.09 to 0.17]). The variability among healthcare areas in the meniscectomy rate progressively decreased from 2003 to 2018. In 2003, 32% (6544 of 20, 384) of knee arthroscopies were performed on an outpatient basis, while in 2018, these accounted for 67% (19, 573 of 29, 430). Conclusion: We observed a progressive increase in arthroscopic meniscectomies in Spain; this procedure was more prevalent in older patients presumed to have degenerative pathologic findings. This increase occurred despite increasing high-level evidence of a lack of the additional benefit of meniscectomy over other less-invasive treatments in middle-aged and older people. Our study highlights the need for action in health systems with the use of financial, regulatory, or incentive strategies to reduce the use of low-value procedures, as well as interventions to disseminate the available evidence to clinicians and patients. Research is needed to identify the barriers that are preventing the reversal of interventions that high-quality evidence shows are ineffective. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study.