This study utilized two decision analytics models comparing bioengineered hyaluronic acid (BioHA) to the patient’s baseline conventional care (CC). The two models consisted of different assumptions: CC with no assumption of disease progression (Model 1), or CC including escalating care costs due to disease progression (model 2). The models were based off of a trial of 586 patients receiving either intra articular BioHA or intra articular saline. Outcomes of interest was the average utility (QALY) gain, cost per QALY gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The results revealed that BioHA is less costly and more effective than CC, and is below a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained, depending on the model used.