207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32862681)
1. A cost-effectiveness assessment of dual-mobility bearings in revision hip arthroplasty.
Khoshbin A; Haddad FS; Ward S; O hEireamhoin S; Wu J; Nherera L; Atrey A
Bone Joint J; 2020 Sep; 102-B(9):1128-1135. PubMed ID: 32862681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Cost-Effectiveness of Dual Mobility Implants for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Computer-Based Cost-Utility Model.
Barlow BT; McLawhorn AS; Westrich GH
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2017 May; 99(9):768-777. PubMed ID: 28463921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-effectiveness of dual-mobility components in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures.
Montgomery S; Bourget-Murray J; You DZ; Nherera L; Khoshbin A; Atrey A; Powell JN
Bone Joint J; 2021 Dec; 103-B(12):1783-1790. PubMed ID: 34847713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. In Revision THA, Is the Re-revision Risk for Dislocation and Aseptic Causes Greater in Dual-mobility Constructs or Large Femoral Head Bearings? A Study from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
Hoskins W; Rainbird S; Dyer C; Graves SE; Bingham R
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2022 Jun; 480(6):1091-1101. PubMed ID: 34978538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cost-effectiveness model comparing dual-mobility to fixed-bearing designs for total hip replacement in France.
Epinette JA; Lafuma A; Robert J; Doz M
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2016 Apr; 102(2):143-8. PubMed ID: 26803224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Trends in the use of dual mobility bearings in hip arthroplasty.
Heckmann N; Weitzman DS; Jaffri H; Berry DJ; Springer BD; Lieberman JR
Bone Joint J; 2020 Jul; 102-B(7_Supple_B):27-32. PubMed ID: 32600197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate new technologies in orthopaedics. The case of alternative bearing surfaces in total hip arthroplasty.
Bozic KJ; Morshed S; Silverstein MD; Rubash HE; Kahn JG
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2006 Apr; 88(4):706-14. PubMed ID: 16595459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cost Analysis of Dual-Mobility Constructs in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A European Payer Perspective.
Abdel MP; Miller LE; Hull SA; Coppolecchia AB; Hanssen AD; Pagnano MW
Orthopedics; 2020 Jul; 43(4):250-255. PubMed ID: 32674176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Choice of Prosthetic Implant Combinations in Total Hip Replacement: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Using UK and Swedish Hip Joint Registries Data.
Fawsitt CG; Thom HHZ; Hunt LP; Nemes S; Blom AW; Welton NJ; Hollingworth W; López-López JA; Beswick AD; Burston A; Rolfson O; Garellick G; Marques EMR
Value Health; 2019 Mar; 22(3):303-312. PubMed ID: 30832968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Do custom 3D-printed revision acetabular implants provide enough value to justify the additional costs? The health-economic comparison of a new porous 3D-printed hip implant for revision arthroplasty of Paprosky type 3B acetabular defects and its closest alternative.
Tack P; Victor J; Gemmel P; Annemans L
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2021 Feb; 107(1):102600. PubMed ID: 32409268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cost Analysis of Ceramic Heads in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Carnes KJ; Odum SM; Troyer JL; Fehring TK
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2016 Nov; 98(21):1794-1800. PubMed ID: 27807111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost Analysis of Dual-Mobility Versus Large Femoral Head Constructs in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Abdel MP; Miller LE; Hanssen AD; Pagnano MW
J Arthroplasty; 2019 Feb; 34(2):260-264. PubMed ID: 30366822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The cost-effectiveness of dual mobility in a spinal deformity population with high risk of dislocation: a computer-based model.
Elbuluk AM; Slover J; Anoushiravani AA; Schwarzkopf R; Eftekhary N; Vigdorchik JM
Bone Joint J; 2018 Oct; 100-B(10):1297-1302. PubMed ID: 30295522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Dual Mobility and Conventional Bearings Have Comparably Low Dislocation Rates for Anterior-Based Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Van Nest DS; Li WT; Kozick Z; Smith EB; Hozack WJ; Courtney PM
J Arthroplasty; 2021 May; 36(5):1695-1699. PubMed ID: 33468345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A cost-effectiveness analysis of total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the hip.
Chang RW; Pellisier JM; Hazen GB
JAMA; 1996 Mar; 275(11):858-65. PubMed ID: 8596224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Do alumina matrix composite bearings decrease hip noises and bearing fractures at a minimum of 5 years after THA?
Baek SH; Kim WK; Kim JY; Kim SY
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 Dec; 473(12):3796-802. PubMed ID: 26126991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Are Ceramic Bearings Becoming Cost-Effective for All Patients Within a 90-Day Bundled Payment Period?
Kurtz SM; Lau E; Baykal D; Odum SM; Springer BD; Fehring TK
J Arthroplasty; 2019 Jun; 34(6):1082-1088. PubMed ID: 30799268
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Outcomes of different bearings in total hip arthroplasty - implant survival, revision causes, and patient-reported outcome.
Varnum C
Dan Med J; 2017 Mar; 64(3):. PubMed ID: 28260601
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Are Ceramic Bearings Becoming Cost-Effective for All Patients?
Kurtz SM; Lau EC; Baykal D; Odum SM; Springer BD; Fehring TK
J Arthroplasty; 2018 May; 33(5):1352-1358. PubMed ID: 29336858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Short-term complications have more effect on cost-effectiveness of THA than implant longevity.
Shearer DW; Youm J; Bozic KJ
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 May; 473(5):1702-8. PubMed ID: 25560958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
