» Articles » PMID: 36864906

Projections and Epidemiology of Primary Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Medicare Patients to 2040-2060

Overview
Date 2023 Mar 3
PMID 36864906
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Methods: The present study used data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare/Medicaid Part B National Summary and combined procedure counts with use of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes to identify whether the procedure was a primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedure. In 2019, the annual volume of primary TKA was 480,958 and that of primary THA was 262,369. These values formed a baseline from which we generated point forecasts for 2020-2060 and 95% forecast intervals (FIs).

Results: Between 2000 and 2019, the estimated annual volume of THA increased by 177% and that of TKA increased by 156% on average. Regression analysis projected an annual growth rate of 5.2% for THA and 4.44% for TKA. Based on these yearly projected increases, an estimated increase of 28.84% and 24.28% is expected for each 5-year period after 2020 for THA and TKA, respectively. By 2040, the number of THAs is projected to be 719,364 (95% FI, 624,766 to 828,286) and the number of TKA is projected to be 1,222,988 (95% FI, 988,714 to 1,512,772). By 2060, the number of THAs is projected to be 1,982,099 (95% FI, 1,624,215 to 2,418,839) and the number of TKAs is projected to be 2,917,959 (95% FI, 2,160,951 to 3,940,156). In 2019, Medicare data showed that THA constituted approximately 35% of TJA procedures performed.

Conclusions: Based on 2019 total volume counts, our model forecasts an increase in THA procedures of 176% by 2040 and 659% by 2060. The estimated increase for TKA is projected to be 139% by 2040 and 469% by 2060. An accurate projection of future primary TJA procedure demands is important in order to understand future health-care utilization and surgeon demand. This finding is only applicable to a Medicare population and demands further analysis to see if this extends to other population groups.

Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Citing Articles

Periprosthetic and Interprosthetic Femoral Fractures: A 20-Year Retrospective Prevalence Analysis Conducted at a Greek Referral Orthopaedic Centre.

Paparoidamis G, Kenanidis E, Grammatikopoulos D, Potoupnis M, Tsiridis E Cureus. 2025; 17(2):e78592.

PMID: 40062055 PMC: 11890338. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.78592.


Effect of surgical approach to hip arthroplasty on postoperative pain and mobilization and on efficacy of intrathecal oxytocin for pain.

Shields J, Ijebuonwu D, Korn E, Mueller A, Houle T, Langfitt M medRxiv. 2025; .

PMID: 40061318 PMC: 11888492. DOI: 10.1101/2025.02.22.25322560.


Imaging evaluation of periprosthetic loosening: A primer for the general radiologist.

Shet S, Kakish E, Murphy S, Roopnarinesingh R, Power S, Maher M World J Radiol. 2025; 17(2):102373.

PMID: 40060958 PMC: 11885930. DOI: 10.4329/wjr.v17.i2.102373.


Injectable alginate/collagen clindamycin hydrogel for treatment of surgical site infections.

Park R, Kim S, An J, Lee M, Yang Y, Valdez T Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):7964.

PMID: 40055420 PMC: 11889102. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-92294-0.


Orthopedic frailty risk stratification (OFRS): a systematic review of the frailty indices predicting adverse outcomes in orthopedics.

Gupta N, Dunivin F, Chmait H, Smitterberg C, Buttar A, Fazal-Ur-Rehman M J Orthop Surg Res. 2025; 20(1):247.

PMID: 40051013 PMC: 11887260. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-025-05609-2.


References
1.
Singh J, Yu S, Chen L, Cleveland J . Rates of Total Joint Replacement in the United States: Future Projections to 2020-2040 Using the National Inpatient Sample. J Rheumatol. 2019; 46(9):1134-1140. DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.170990. View

2.
Casals M, Girabent-Farres M, Carrasco J . Methodological quality and reporting of generalized linear mixed models in clinical medicine (2000-2012): a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014; 9(11):e112653. PMC: 4236119. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112653. View

3.
Pierce A, Menendez M, Tybor D, Salzler M . Three Different Databases, Three Different Complication Rates for Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: Comparing the National Inpatient Sample, National Hospital Discharge Survey, and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, 2006 to 2010. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2018; 27(12):e568-e576. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00789. View

4.
Gwam C, Mistry J, Mohamed N, Thomas M, Bigart K, Mont M . Current Epidemiology of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in the United States: National Inpatient Sample 2009 to 2013. J Arthroplasty. 2017; 32(7):2088-2092. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.046. View

5.
Bedard N, Elkins J, Brown T . Effect of COVID-19 on Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Surgical Volume in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2020; 35(7S):S45-S48. PMC: 7194697. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.04.060. View