We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Health-related quality of life and direct costs in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury: single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction in a low-demand cohort--a randomized trial with 2 years of follow-up.
Arthroscopy 2012 July
PURPOSE: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructive surgery by use of 2 procedures and to estimate the direct costs of surgery.
METHODS: We performed a 2-year randomized, prospective intervention study of 2 surgical ACL reconstruction techniques (anatomic single bundle [SB] v double bundle [DB]). Fifty-five consecutive outpatients, with a mean age of 30.88 years, were randomized to SB or DB ACL reconstruction. The Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) was used to measure HRQL (primary outcome). ACL injuries were assessed by the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score (secondary outcome). The use of medical resources and their costs were evaluated.
RESULTS: We included 52 patients in the final analyses (23 in the SB group and 29 in the DB group). At baseline, there were no significant differences in study variables. At 2 years of follow-up, there were no significant differences in SF-36 and IKDC scores between groups. However, compared with baseline, the SF-36 physical function, physical role, bodily pain, social function, and emotional role scores were significantly better in the SB group (P < .05), whereas only the physical function dimension score was better in the DB group (P = .047). IKDC scores at 2 years improved significantly in the SB group (P < .001) and DB group (P = .004) compared with baseline. There was a significant correlation between the SF-36 physical function, physical role, and bodily pain dimensions and the IKDC score at 2 years (P < .05). The costs were € 3,251 for the SB group and € 4,172 for the DB group.
CONCLUSIONS: HRQL and medical outcomes were similar between SB and DB ACL reconstruction techniques, 2 years after surgery. However, the SB technique was more cost-effective.
METHODS: We performed a 2-year randomized, prospective intervention study of 2 surgical ACL reconstruction techniques (anatomic single bundle [SB] v double bundle [DB]). Fifty-five consecutive outpatients, with a mean age of 30.88 years, were randomized to SB or DB ACL reconstruction. The Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) was used to measure HRQL (primary outcome). ACL injuries were assessed by the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score (secondary outcome). The use of medical resources and their costs were evaluated.
RESULTS: We included 52 patients in the final analyses (23 in the SB group and 29 in the DB group). At baseline, there were no significant differences in study variables. At 2 years of follow-up, there were no significant differences in SF-36 and IKDC scores between groups. However, compared with baseline, the SF-36 physical function, physical role, bodily pain, social function, and emotional role scores were significantly better in the SB group (P < .05), whereas only the physical function dimension score was better in the DB group (P = .047). IKDC scores at 2 years improved significantly in the SB group (P < .001) and DB group (P = .004) compared with baseline. There was a significant correlation between the SF-36 physical function, physical role, and bodily pain dimensions and the IKDC score at 2 years (P < .05). The costs were € 3,251 for the SB group and € 4,172 for the DB group.
CONCLUSIONS: HRQL and medical outcomes were similar between SB and DB ACL reconstruction techniques, 2 years after surgery. However, the SB technique was more cost-effective.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app