BUDGET IMPACT OF THE KINCISE 2 SYSTEM COMPARED TO MANUAL IMPACTION IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY IN THE UNITED STATES
Author(s)
Jean-Baptiste Trouiller, PharmD1, Mina Kabiri, PhD2, Rodrigo Diaz, MD3;
1Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Paris, France, 2Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Austin, TX, USA, 3Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, USA
1Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Paris, France, 2Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Austin, TX, USA, 3Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, USA
OBJECTIVES: The KINCISE 2 System (K2) is used for automated broaching during total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedure, with positive impacts on efficiency and surgeon physical strain, compared to manual impaction. K2 use incurs an additional cost compared to manual impaction. This study estimated the economic impact of using K2 compared to manual impaction during THA procedures in the United States.
METHODS: We developed an economic model to estimate the budget impact of K2 use compared to manual impaction from the hospital perspective for a hypothetical cohort of 250 patients per year over 3 years. The model included device costs and surgery time. Clinical and cost inputs were sourced from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to test model robustness.
RESULTS: Over 3 years, using K2 resulted in overall savings of $300,600 versus manual impaction, corresponding to savings of $401 per patient. These savings were attributed to surgical time savings, which fully offset the additional cost of K2.
CONCLUSIONS: From a US hospital perspective, the use of K2 during THA generated cost savings compared to THA done with manual impaction. Beyond these savings, K2 may also enhance workflow efficiency by reducing surgical time.
METHODS: We developed an economic model to estimate the budget impact of K2 use compared to manual impaction from the hospital perspective for a hypothetical cohort of 250 patients per year over 3 years. The model included device costs and surgery time. Clinical and cost inputs were sourced from published literature. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted to test model robustness.
RESULTS: Over 3 years, using K2 resulted in overall savings of $300,600 versus manual impaction, corresponding to savings of $401 per patient. These savings were attributed to surgical time savings, which fully offset the additional cost of K2.
CONCLUSIONS: From a US hospital perspective, the use of K2 during THA generated cost savings compared to THA done with manual impaction. Beyond these savings, K2 may also enhance workflow efficiency by reducing surgical time.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
EE185
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Budget Impact Analysis
Disease
STA: Surgery