At our district general hospital in the southwest of England, around 694 total knee replacements (TKR) are performed annually. Since spring 2013 we have been using an enhanced recovery protocol for all TKR patients, yet we have neither assessed compliance with the protocol nor whether its implementation has made a discernible and measurable difference to the delivery of care in this patient population. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are multi-modal care pathways designed to aid recovery. They are based on best evidence and promote a multi-disciplinary approach which standardises care and encompasses nutrition, analgesia and early mobilisation throughout the pre, intra and postoperative phases of an inpatient stay. ERAS has been found to reduce length of stay (LOS), readmission rates and analgesic requirements following surgery. 1, 2, 3. Additionally, they have been shown to improve range of knee movement following TKR and improve mobility, patient satisfaction whilst reducing mortality and morbidity. 4, 5, 6. With these benefits in mind, we sought to investigate how well our trauma and orthopaedic department was complying with a local ERAS protocol and whether we could replicate the benefits seen within the literature. Following approval from our local audit office in September 2015 we generated a patient list of elective TKR patients under the same surgeon before and after the implementation of the ERAS protocol. Using discharge summaries and patient notes we extracted data for 39 patients operated on prior to the ERAS implementation between January 2011 and December 2012 and 27 patients following its introduction between January 2014 and September 2015. Data collected included length of stay, time to discharge from inpatient physiotherapy and use of analgesia and antiemetics. Alongside this we audited the compliance with all facets of the local ERAS protocol. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of demographics or pre-operative morbidity. Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was good but there was some variability, especially with intraoperative medication and type of anaesthesia which was likely due to individual patient factors. Compliance with postoperative analgesia was especially good with 93% of patients receiving all 4 suggested analgesics within the ERAS group. Length of stay (LOS) was significantly reduced by 0.5 days per patient (p value < 0.4). Overall compliance with the ERAS protocol was good but there was some variability, especially with intraoperative medication and type of anaesthesia, which was likely due to individual patient factors. Compliance with postoperative analgesia was especially good with 93% of patients receiving all suggested analgesics within the ERAS group. In terms of LOS, we found a statistically significant difference between the pre-ERAS and ERAS group of 0.5 days per patient. Within the context of our DGH, a 0.5 day reduction in LOS translates to around 350 bed days per year and a potential saving of GBP 105,000 (EUR 132,000) making this a clinically significant finding

The Enhanced Recovery Pathway aims to improve the patient experience as well as expediting discharge. We aim to discharge 85% of patients by day 3. This audit retrospectively looked at primary total hip replacements (THR) and total knee replacements (TKR) patients who had 7 days length of stay and evaluated the factors contributing to the delay. There were 24 patients who stayed 7 days, 12 THR and 12 TKR. There were 15 females and 7 males, the mean age was 77 years (52 to 89). Causes for the delay included patient's reluctance to engage in their rehabilitation (21/24) and Occupational Therapists (OT) identifying difficulties in patient's home circumstances on admission (12/24). Medical problems also delayed early mobilisation, particularly urethral catheterisation (9/24), investigation for venous thromboembolism (6/24) and blood transfusion (3/24). Delay in discharge is multifactorial and requires involvement of MDT. We have identified ways to enhance patient engagement, including a “patient journey” DVD shown preoperatively at “Joint School” and individual white boards for daily goal setting. Fostering greater self-efficacy in patients may improve participation in preoperative discharge planning with OTs. Specific preoperative education may help patients understand the importance of continuing their rehabilitation while medical problems are managed

Introduction. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multi-disciplinary approach for establishing procedure–specific, evidence-based perioperative protocols to optimize patient outcomes. ERAS evidence is predominantly for non-orthopaedic procedures. We review the impact of ERAS protocol implementation on total joint arthroplasty (TJA) outcomes at our institution. Methods. All primary total hip and knee arthroplasties performed one year before and after ERAS implementation were identified by current procedural terminology code. Length of stay (LOS), disposition, readmission and opioid usage were analyzed before and after ERAS implementation and statistically analyzed with student t-test and chi-square test. Results. 2105 total patients were identified (967 THA, 494 pre-ERAS and 473 post-ERAS;1138 TKA, 575 pre-ERAS and 563 post-ERAS). TKA. After ERAS implementation, opioid consumption decreased for hospital day one (45.5MME to 36.2MME; p=0.000) and overall hospitalization (101.9MME to 83.9MME; p =0.000). Average LOS decreased (73.28hrs to 66.44hrs; p=0.000), blood transfusion rate trended down (3.3% to 1.95%; p=0.155), and disposition to home over skilled nursing facility increased (57.8% to 71.6%; p=0.000). Unplanned return-to-hospital encounters were unchanged (13.22% to 12.79%; p=0.8504). 30-day and 90-day readmission rates decreased (7.30% to 3.02%; p=0.0020 and 8.5% to 4.8%; p=0.0185, respectively). THA. After ERAS implementation, opioid consumption decreased for hospital day one (49.5MME to 35.4MME; p=0.000) and overall hospitalization (79.5MME to 59.5MME; p=0.000). Average LOS decreased (57.84hrs to 51.87hrs; p=0.011), blood transfusion rate was unchanged (4.25% to 3.81%; p=0.725), and disposition to home over skilled nursing facility increased (80.4% to 82.5%; p= 0.022). Unplanned return-to-hospital encounters were unchanged (8.51% to 8.88%; p=0.8486). Readmission trended up during postoperative days 0–30 and trended down during postoperative days 31–90. (1.42% to 2.96%; p=0.1074) and (1.21% to 0.85%; p=0.5748), respectively. Conclusion. ERAS protocols reduce postoperative opioid consumption, decrease hospital LOS, and increase patient disposition to home without adversely affecting short-term readmission rates

Background. Predicting length of stay (LOS) is key to providing a cost effective and efficient arthroplasty service in an era of increasing financial constraint. Previous studies predicting LOS have not considered enhanced recovery protocols in elective hip and knee arthroplasty. Our study aims to identify patient variables in the pre and peri-operative period to predict increased LOS on patients enrolled into the standardised Chichester and Worthing Enhanced Recovery Programme (CWERP). Methods. All patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty were enrolled into CWERP using standardised anaesthetic, surgical and analgesic protocols. A data analyst prospectively collated data over 6months from anaesthetic charts and daily ward review from 663 patients between Dec 2012 and June 2013. An independent statistician undertook statistical analysis (program R, version 3.1.1). 80% of the 6months consecutive data (530 patients) were analysed, and predictive variables identified. These variables were tested against the remaining 20% of data (133 patients) predicting a LOS greater or less than our median of 4 days. Results. 663 patients were enrolled into CWERP over this period, 54% in hip arthroplasty. Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-squared test for association between actual and predicted (dichotomised) LOS being significant (p<0.0000000017). In the initial 80% (530 patients), this identified the following statistically significant variables in predicting LOS > 4 days: Age > 80 yrs, ASA 4, failure to mobilise on day of surgery, urinary catheterisation and need for blood transfusion. The statistical model when applied to the remaining 20% (133 patients) correctly categorised LOS in 101 (76%) of the patients. Conclusions. Identifying patients who fulfil our variables in the preoperative period affords better planning, maximising resources, bed efficiency and discharge planning. This also provides opportunities for financial remuneration for higher risk patients. Level of Evidence. 4

The need for hip and knee replacement surgery is increasing. Enhanced recovery programmes, where patients mobilise quickly and safely after surgery, have been adopted now in many hospitals. There are anecdotal reports of Primary Care Trusts raising thresholds for referral for surgery based on patients' Body Mass Index (BMI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the early outcome of hip and knee arthroplasty in obese patients (BMI>30) enrolled in the enhanced recovery programme. Between March 2010 and January 2011, 672 patients were enrolled in our enhanced recovery programme. 316 patients (47%) were classified as obese (BMI>30, range 30-39). There was no significant difference in the length of stay: 4.58 days in the obese patients and 4.44 days in the non-obese. There was also no difference in the rates of superficial infections or oozy wounds. Knee replacements was performed more commonly than hip replacements in the obese group. There was no significant difference in the early outcome of hip and knee replacement surgery in patients with a higher Body Mass Index when undergoing lower limb arthroplasty through the enhanced recovery programme. These patients should continue to be offered surgery when clinically indicated

Introduction. Obesity is a direct contributor to degenerative joint disease, and as the prevalence of obesity increases globally it is likely that more overweight patients will present for hip replacement surgery. There are reports that overweight patients in the UK's National Health Service, typically with a Body Mass Index (BMI) over 30 (BMI 30–39 obese, BMI≥40 morbidly obese), are being denied operations on the premise that they are at risk of significant complications. Enhanced Recovery Programmes (ERP) are designed to enable patients to recover quickly and return home safely within a few days. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of hip replacements in obese and non-obese patients enrolled in our ERP. Methods. We prospectively studied 350 patients who underwent primary and revision total hip replacements and were treated through our ERP form March 2010 to January 2011. The mean age was 68 (range 23–92 years). 130 patients (37%) were considered obese with a BMI of >30. 11 patients (3%) were considered morbidly obese with a BMI >40. They were age & sex-matched with the non-obese patients. Outcomes measured included: Length of stay, wound complications (including surgical site infections), deep vein thrombosis and blood transfusion requirements. Data was collected to 42 days following discharge. Results. There was no significant difference in the length of stay between the obese (BMI >30) and non-obese (BMI<30) groups; 4.3 days (median 4) and 4.1 days (median 4) respectively. Mean length of stay in the morbidly obese group (BMI≥40) was interestingly, 3.4 days (median 3). 12 patients (9%) in the obese group experienced non-infective wound complications including oozing and haematoma formation compared to 15 patients (7%) of the non-obese group. One confirmed DVT was identified in the morbidly obese group (BMI 41). There were no significant differences in surgical site infections, blood transfusion requirements, or other patient-reported outcome measures at 42 days. Conclusion. Body mass index (BMI) did not affect the early post-operative outcome of hip replacements in patients enrolled in the ERP. Based on the evidence provided by this study, we would continue to offer hip replacement surgery irrespective of body mass index

Introduction. Enhanced Recovery Protocol (ERP) for elective total hip or total knee replacement has become the gold standard. The main principles are to reduce bleeding, both with a tranexamic acid infusion and local injection of adrenaline, and to reduce the risk of postoperative thrombo-embolic complications by early mobilisation, enabled by local anaesthetic infiltration at time of surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the ERP. Methods. A retrospective review was performed including all patients who underwent primary hip or knee arthroplasty surgery between January 2011 and December 2013. The ERP was implemented in our department in August 2012 thus creating two cohorts; the traditional postoperative group and those undergoing ERP. Outcome measurements of length of stay, postoperative transfusion, thrombo-embolic complications and number of re-admissions were assessed. Results. 1262 patients were included. The traditional group contained a total of 632 patients and the ERP group contained 630 patients. The number of patients receiving a blood transfusion postoperatively significantly decreased from 50 (7.9%) to 27 (4.3%) (p value <0.05). There was no statistical difference in postoperative thrombo-embolic events. The length of stay was reduced from 5.5 days to 4.8 days (P value <0.05). There was no difference in the number of re-admissions. Conclusion. ERP has led to a significant decrease in transfusions after elective arthroplasty surgery, without increasing the incidence of thrombo-embolic events. Furthermore it has significantly reduced the length of stay which has obvious cost implications. This study agrees with the current literature in that enhanced recovery should indeed be the gold standard for elective arthroplasty procedures

Introduction. The Direct Anterior Approach (DAA) offers potential advantages of quicker rehabilitation compared to posterior approach THR. The aim of this study was to compare hospital based and early clinical outcomes between these two groups with utilisation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. Patients/Materials & Methods. Prospectively collected data for both cohorts were matched for age, gender, ASA grade, BMI, operation side, Pre-operative Oxford Hip score (OHS) and attendance at multi-disciplinary joint school. The pain scores at 0,1,2,3 post-op days, the day of mobilization, inpatient duration, complications, 28 days readmission rates and OHS at 6 and 24 months were compared. Results. Four hundred and fifty two THR (DAA: 219, Posterior: 233) were matched. There was no difference in OHS at 6 months (p=0.07). There was also no difference in pain scores at 0, 1, 2, and 3rd post op days, the day of first mobilization (p=0.32), length of stay (p= 0.3), 28 days readmission (p=0.11) or OHS at 24 months (p=0. 09). 68% of DAA vs 58 % of posterior approach patients achieved planned in-patient duration target of 3 days (p= 0.04). There were six peri-prosthetic femoral fractures in DAA group vs one in posterior approach group (p=0.097). No significant difference was identified for complications, re-operation or 28 days readmission rates between two groups. Discussion. The DAA procedures were performed by two surgeons with extensive prior experience in DAA approach. The potential advantages and complications especially during early learning curve have to be carefully considered by operating surgeon who wishes to start performing DAA approach. The ERAS protocol can potentially reduce the difference in early recovery between two groups. Conclusion. There is no significant difference in clinical outcomes between DAA and posterior approach THR with utilisation of ERAS protocol except potential of discharge from the hospital within three days following the DAA procedure

Hyponatraemia is a potentially preventable post-operative complication following hip arthroplasty. There is a paucity of literature reporting its incidence and guidelines for prevention - unlike AKI which has been prioritised to great success. Hyponatraemia is now rife in elective orthopaedics causing multiple symptoms that delay ambulation and increase the length of hospital stay. We aim to assess the incidence of hyponatraemia and AKI as a benchmark following elective primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), as well as identify patients most at risk in a high volume arthroplasty centre.

Between April 2018 and September 2018 all primary THA surgeries performed in one hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Pre-operative and 1 day post operative bloods were analysed. Patients included had normal pre-operative sodium.

A total of 221 patients underwent THA. The mean age was 73.6 and ASA 2.1. No patients had a recorded AKI, however 42% of patients had a new post operative hyponatraemia. Of the hyponatraemia cases, 75% were mild, 18% were moderate, and 7% were severe. There was correlation between increased age and increased severity of hyponatraemia. The mean age of patients with mild hyponatraemia was 72.1, moderate was 77.7, and severe was 78.8. An association between ASA and severity of hyponatraemia was noted. In patients who had an ASA of 4 and hyponatraemia, 66% were moderate or severe, ASA 3 was 25%, ASA 2 was 24% and ASA 1 was 0%. The patients who had severe hyponatraemia received on average 3.5L fluid input perioperatively.

Rates of post op hyponatraemia are significantly higher than AKI in primary THA. Severity of hyponatraemia increases with age and ASA. Due to its negative outcomes on recovery the high levels of hyponatraemia are worrying. We have identified which patient cohorts are more at risk and recommend more care should be taken in their perioperative fluid balance. It may be beneficial to consider successful AKI prevention and management campaigns and apply them to the prevention of hyponatraemia following hip arthroplasty.

Introduction. Total Hip Replacement (THR) is an effective treatment for end stage degenerative disease of the hip and offers patients the prospect of long term pain relief, improved joint function and quality of life. Enhanced Recovery Programmes (ERP) aim to standardise routine perioperative care, reduce hospital length of stay (LOS) and promote rapid recovery after elective surgery. The aim of this study was to determine whether the implementation of an ERP could successfully reduce the length of hospital stay associated with primary THR and whether this could be achieved without compromising the expected functional outcome or risking an increased dislocation rate. Patients/Materials & Methods. Prospectively collected data on 1161 patients (611 managed with traditional rehabilitation and 550 with ERP) undergoing primary unilateral THR between 2005 and 2013 was retrospectively reviewed. Univariable statistical analysis was undertaken to identify factors that appeared to predict length of stay and a multiple linear regression model was then constructed to determine the significance and strength of effect of the individual predictors. Results. Median LOS was 5 days for those managed in the traditional method and 3 days for those managed with ERP (p<0.001). Multivariate regression models demonstrate that this effect on LOS is independent of and stronger than other factors affecting LOS and we did not observe increased rates of dislocation (1.03% versus 0.73%, p=0.75) or mortality (1.5% versus 0.6%, p=0.14) at one year postoperative in patients managed with ERP. Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in mean Harris Hip Score (+42.8 versus +41.5) at twelve to eighteen months postoperative and there was no significant difference in the magnitude of improvement between groups (p=0.09). Discussion. This is the first study to demonstrate the independent effect of ERP on LOS through multiple regression analysis and to directly compare functional outcomes of patients managed with ERP with the accepted gold standard (traditional rehabilitation) and these findings will be of use to surgeons counselling patients peiroperatively and healthcare planners. Conclusion. Implementation of ERP can reduce the hospital LOS for primary THR without adverse effects on dislocation rates and functional outcomes at 12 to 18 months postoperative

Introduction. Rivaroxiban is a direct inhibitor of factor Xa, a licensed oral thromboprophylactic agent that is increasingly being adopted for lower limb arthroplasty. Rivaroxiban has been NICE-approved for use in primary hip and knee arthroplasty following the RECORD 4 trials; proving it more effective in preventing venous thrombo-embolic (VTE) events compared to enoxaparin. Enhanced Recovery Programmes (ERP) are designed to enable patients to recover quickly and return home safely within a few days. Methods. We prospectively studied 1223 patients (age- and sex-matched) who underwent lower-limb arthroplasty enrolled in our ERP between March 2010 and December 2011; 454 patients (Group 1) received enoxaparin, 769 patients (Group 2) received rivaroxiban. Patients wore thrombo-embolic stockings for six weeks post surgery. Patients were monitored for thrombo-embolic events and wound-related complications for 42 days post-operatively. Results. 1223 patients underwent lower-limb arthroplasty during our study period. There were similar numbers of THRs and TKRs in each group 230:224 and 370:399. Average length of stay was 4.9 days (range 1–19) in group 1 and 4.5 days (range 2–23) in group 2. The rate of VTE events was the same in both groups (< 1%). In group 1 (enoxaparin), 21(4.6%) of the 454 patients experienced oozing/infected wounds that required further surgical attention. In group 2 (rivaroxiban), 46 (6%) of the 769 patients had wound-related complications, of which 70% were in primary THR patients. Conclusion. Rivaroxabans use in clinical practice has been questioned concerning its wound-related complications. The RECORD 4 trial focused on major bleeding as the primary safety outcome, however we postulate slow post-operative oozing can lead to haematoma formation, increasing the risk of superficial wound and deep infections potentially requiring revision surgery. This study shows an increased wound complication rate in the Rivaroxiban group, highlighting the need for further clinical trials to assess its safety and efficacy

Aim:. Enhanced recovery pathway is compromised by increased wound oozing due to chemical thromboprophylaxis increasing length of stay (LoS) and complications. We aimed to analyse the difference between LoS, VTE episodes, deep infection and return to theatre between matched cohort of patients either receiving combination therapy of Clexane followed by Rivaroxaban or Rivaroxaban only. Methods:. We retrospectively collected data on LoS of patients undergoing hip and knee replacements, The cohorts consisted of 458 THRs (235 group I & 223 group II and 526 TKRs (250 group I & 276 group II). Group I received Rivaroxaban. Age was not an exclusion criteria and matched in both groups. ASA 1 to stable ASA3 patients were included in the cohort. Included were patients on aspirin 75 mg PO which was not stopped pre-operatively in either cohort in equal numbers. Anaesthetic and perioperative management of the patients as part of our enhanced recovery protocols were the same for both groups. Multimodal pain management, antibiotic prophylaxis, same day mobilisation, flowtron calf pumps, TED stockings, preoperative MRSA screening was standardised and matched. For TKRs a standard medial parapatellar approach and THRs a standard posterolateral (Southern) approach were utilised. Patients did not have a drain insitu. Exclusion criteria was patients with malignancy, haematological co-morbidities, Hb below 11 and BMI greater than 40. All prosthesis used were standardised to cemented TKR, cemented THR or uncemented THR depending on bone quality at the time of surgery. Patients in first cohort (group I) received 10 mg Rivaroxaban at 8 hours post op and continued for 14 days for TKRs and 35 days for THRs. Patients in group II received Clexane 40 mg SC at 8 hours post op followed by Rivaroxaban at 24 hours after first dose of Clexane and continued daily for 14 days for TKRs and 35 days for THRs. Results:. LoS in group I was 3.52 days for THRs and 3.57 days for TKRs. LOS in Group II was 2.37 days for THRs and 2.52 days for TKRs. Return to theatre in group 1 was1.3% for THRs and 0% for TKRs. In Group II was 0.4% for THRs and 0% for TKRs. Deep infection in group I was 0.4% for THRs and 0.8% for TKRs. In Group II was 0%. VTE episodes was similar in both groups. These are statistically significant. Conclusion:. By using a combined use of Chemical VTE agents we halved our complications such as deep infection and helped in our enhanced recovery programme by reducing the LoS by one day whilst VTE events remained the same. The novel combination of administration of low molecular weight heparin followed by an extended course of Rivaroxaban appeared to be a safer means of chemical thromboprophylaxis

Background. The Enhanced Recovery Programme (ERP) is an evidence based initiative aimed at speeding up patient recovery after major surgery and improving their outcomes. The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore (RNOH) is a specialist orthopaedic and implemented an ERP for primary knee arthroplasties from October 2010. Aims. To analyse the initial results of patients participating in our ERP for primary knee arthroplasty to identify what factors predict their Length of Stay (LoS) and establish where changes can be made to improve outcomes further. Method. We interrogated our prospective ERP database and determined which patients achieved and which ones exceeded the 5-day LoS target. We then performed a further retrospective notes review to gather supplementary information including non-modifiable patient factors to identify factors which influenced their LoS. Results. 261 patients participated in the Knee ERP at the RNOH between October 2010 and December 2011 including patients undergoing complex procedures and bilateral procedures during the same in-patient episode. Mean age was 64 years (32–85 years). Mean LoS was 6.1 days (2–29 days). ASA grade and attendance at the multidisciplinary Joint School all had a positive influence on the LoS, particularly when combined. The day of mobilisation had the greatest correlation with those mobilising early. Mean LoS was 2.8 (Day 0), 4.41 (Day 1), 6.38 (Day 2), 9.23 (Day 3) and 12.95 (Day 4 or later). Conclusion. Identifying and targeting modifiable variables can further improve the outcomes for this particular group of patients. ASA grade and attendance at the multidisciplinary Joint School are among the positive influences on patient LoS. Adjusting analgesia to reduce unwanted effects may facilitate earlier engagement with the physiotherapy service and thus earlier mobilisation. Early results suggest encouraging patients to attend Joint School with subsequently early postoperative mobilisation can positively influence safe return to the home environment

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) utilise multimodal rehabilitation techniques to reduce post-operative pain and accelerate the rehabilitation process following surgery. Originally described following elective colonic surgery enhanced recovery pathways have gained increasing use following elective hip and knee joint replacement in recent years. Early studies have indicated that enhanced recovery pathways can reduce length of hospital stay, reduce complications and improve cost-effectiveness of joint replacement surgery. Despite this growing evidence base uptake has been slow in certain centres and many surgeons are yet to utilise enhanced recovery pathways in their practice. We look at the process and effects of implementing an enhanced recovery pathway following total hip replacement surgery at a district general hospital in the United Kingdom. A retrospective study was initially undertaken over a four-month period to assess patient demographics, length of stay, time to physiotherapy and complication rates including re-admission within 28 days. Based on national recommendations an enhanced recovery pathway protocol was then implemented for an elective total hip replacement list. Inclusion criteria were elective patients undergoing primary total hip replacement (THR) surgery. The pathway included pre-operative nutrition optimisation, 4mg ondansetron, 8mg dexamethasone and 1g tranexamic acid at induction and 150mL ropivacaine HCL 0.2%, 30mg ketorolac and adrenaline (RKA) mix infiltration to joint capsule, external rotators, gluteus tendon, iliotibial band, soft-tissues and skin around the hip joint. The patient was mobilised four-hours after surgery where possible and aimed to be discharged once mobile and pain was under control. Following implementation a prospective study was undertaken to compare patient demographics, length of stay and complication rates including re-admission within 28 days. 34 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in each group pre and post-enhanced recovery pathway. Following implementation of an enhanced recovery pathway mean length of stay decreased from 5.4 days to 3.5 days (CI 1.94, p < 0.0001). Sub-group analysis based on ASA grade revealed that this reduction in length of stay was most pronounced in ASA 1 patients with mean length of stay reduced from 5.0 days to 3.2 days (CI 1.83, p < 0.0001). There was no significant change in the number of complications or re-admission rates following enhanced recovery pathway. The enhanced recovery pathway was quick and easy to implement with co-ordination between surgeons, anaesthetist, nursing staff and patients. This observational study of consecutive primary total hip replacement patients shows a substantial reduction in length of stay with no change in complication rates after the introduction of a multimodal enhanced recovery protocol. Both of these factors reduce hospital costs for elective THR patients and may improve patient experiences

Aims. To establish if the principles of Enhanced Recovery, an evidence-based, integrated, multi-modal approach to improving recovery following colonic resection are transferable to elective orthopaedic primary arthroplasty surgery. The principles are to reduce the stress response provoked by surgery and eliminate the peri-operative catabolic state by optimally managing patients' metabolism, expectations, postoperative pain and mobility. This combination of interventions has not been tested in Orthopaedics before. Methods. We conducted a single surgeon, consecutive patient, interventional, cohort study of primary total hip and knee arthroplasties. Our intervention was Enhanced Orthopaedic Recovery (EOR). Results. We retrospectively reviewed 138 primary joint replacements. We performed a power calculation before prospectively assessing the next 50 hip and 32 knee arthroplasties. A two-tailed t-test showed a highly statistically significant fall in mean time to discharge (Hips 8.1-5.4 total nights stay, p=0.003, knees 8.5-5.3 total nights stay, p<0.001) and a fall in expected date of discharge from 5 to 3 postoperative days. We studied the complication and readmission rate and found no apparent difference. Conclusions. We have shown that by implementing EOR, reduced time to functional recovery and subsequent hospital discharge can be safely achieved with consequent quality of life and health economic benefits

An enhanced recovery programme for knee arthroplasty was introduced two years ago to our orthopaedic department. It involved the setting up of an educational programme for patients along with an extensive rehabilitation programme. The main aim of the programme is to provide an efficient and personalised service that results in an improved patient experience and fewer bed days following surgery.

We carried out a retrospective study, randomly selecting 100 patients over a period of a year who were enrolled in the enhanced recovery programme. We analysed three main areas involving the pre-, peri- and post-operative period. We looked for any key factors that led to an increase or decrease in bed days. The re-admissions were analysed and the cost benefit was calculated.

99 patients were randomly selected and satisfied the inclusion criteria. We found that with the enhanced recovery programme the average length of stay for a knee arthroplasty was four days. There were no re-admissions within the population.

We would like to share our enhanced recovery programme model as we feel it is a robust and effective way of providing a high level of care and decreasing the length of stay post-operatively.

Post-operative regimes involving the use of intra-articular local anaesthetic infiltration may allow early mobilisation in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Few studies have evaluated such regimes outside specialist arthroplasty units. We aimed to determine whether an enhanced recovery programme including the use of local anaesthetic administration could be adapted for use in a district general setting.

Following introduction of this regime to our unit, 100 consecutive patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty were reviewed. 56 patients underwent a standard analgesic regime involving a general or spinal anaesthetic and oral analgesics post operatively (group1). 48 patients underwent the newly introduced regime, which included pre-operative counselling, peri-articular local anaesthetic infiltration at operation and intra-articular local anaesthetic top-up administration post-operatively for 24 hours (group 2). Length of stay, post-operative analgesic requirements, and range of knee motion post-operatively were compared.

Median length of stay was less for patients in group 2 compared with those in group 1 (4 days compared to 5 days, p<0.05). Patients in group 2 required lower total doses of opiate analgesia post-operatively. 90% of patients in group 2 were ambulant on the first post operative day, compared with less than 25% of patients in group 1. Mean knee flexion on discharge was greater in patients in group 2 compared with those in group 1 (85 degrees compared with 75 degrees). No infective complications from intra-articular catheter placement were observed. However, technical difficulties were encountered during the introduction period, including loss of catheter placement, leakage of local anaesthetic and adaptation of nursing time for top-up anaesthetic administration.

A rehabilitation regime involving local anaesthetic infiltration for total knee arthroplasty can successfully be adapted for use in a district general setting. Our results suggest if initial technical difficulties are overcome, this regime can provide effective postoperative analgesia, early mobilisation and reduced hospital stay.

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, there has been a shift toward outpatient and short-stay protocols for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We developed a peri-operative THA and TKA short stay protocol following the Enhance Recovery After Surgery principles (ERAS), aiming at both optimizing patients’ outcomes and reducing the hospital length of stay. The objective of this study was to evaluate the implementation of our ERAS short-stay protocol. We hypothesized that our ERAS THA and TKA short-stay protocol would result in a lower complication rate, shorter hospital length of stay and reduced direct health care costs compared to our standard procedure.

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of combining enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) interventions with an outpatient THA/TKA program are uncertain. The primary objective was to compare adverse event rate and secondly to compare pain management, functional recovery, PROMs and patients' satisfaction.

We reviewed renal function of 22 patients who had undergone total knee replacements using the enhanced recovery protocol (Caledonian technique) between August 2012 and November 2012 at a district general hospital in the west of Scotland. Pre-operative and post operative data were compared to determine if there was any change. We observed that 4 out of 22 (18%) of patients had a significant rise in creatinine, and 6 out of 22 (27%) had an abnormal eGFR. These findings were significant and were classed as (Acute Kidney Injury) AKI type 1, which should be treated actively.

Subsequently, we collected data in the same way for 22 patients who underwent total knee replacements without using the enhanced recovery protocol. In this group, only one (5%) had a significant rise in creatinine and 2 (9%) had an abnormal eGFR.

Significant difference is noted in the two groups.

We conclude that the enhanced recovery protocol has some adverse effect on a patient's renal function. Our hypothesis is that this is due to restriction of fluids after surgery but a larger study is needed to find the cause and ways to avoid this.