Abstract
Aim
People awaiting surgery for bone and joint infection may be recommended to stop smoking to improve anaesthetic and surgical outcomes. However, restricting curative surgical treatment to non-smokers on the basis of potentially worse surgical outcomes is not validated for functional outcomes or quality of life differences between patients who do and do not smoke.
This study used secondary analysis of trial data to ask: do peri-operative non-smokers have a greater improvement in their quality of life 12 months after surgery for bone and joint infection, compared with non-smokers?
Method
Participants in the SOLARIO and OVIVA clinical trials who had complete baseline and 12 month EQ-5D-5L or EQ-5D-3L scores were included. Smoking status was ascertained at baseline study enrolment from participant self-report. Normalised quality of life scores were calculated for participants at baseline and 12 months, based on contemporaneous health state scores for England. Baseline and 12 month scores were compared to calculate a post-operative increment in quality of life.
Results
Mean quality of life increment over 12 months was +0.17 for people who reported smoking peri-operatively (95% confidence interval −0.55 to +0.89), compared to +0.23 for people who did not report smoking peri-operatively (95% confidence interval −0.48 to +0.94). Linear regression analysis found no significant difference between the improvement in quality of life for smokers and non-smokers (p>0.1). Mean increments for both groups were greater than estimates of Minimal Clinically Important Difference in quality of life in musculoskeletal conditions. [1,2]
Conclusions
People who smoke peri-operatively still experience an improvement in quality of life after surgery for orthopaedic infections, commensurate with the improvement experienced by non-smokers. Surgery should not be denied to people on the basis of reported smoking status alone.
