Instability is a common indication for revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, even after the initial revision, some patients continue to have recurrent dislocations. This study investigates those at risk for recurrent dislocation after revision THA for instability at a single institution. Between 2009 and 2019, 163 patients underwent revision THA for instability at a single institution. Thirty-three of these patients required re-revision THA due to recurrent dislocation. Cox proportional hazard models with death as a competing event were used to analyze risk factors, including prosthesis sizing and alignment. Paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to assess patient outcomes (Veterans RAND 12 (VR-12) physical score, VR-12 mental score, Harris Hip Score, and hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint replacement). Duration of follow-up until either re-revision or final follow-up was a mean of 45.3 ± 38.2 months. The 1-year cumulative incidence for recurrent dislocation after revision was 8.7%, which increased to 19.6% at 5 years and 32.9% at 10 years postoperatively. In the multivariable analysis, high ASA score [HR 2.71], being underweight (BMI<18 kg/m2) [HR 36.26] or overweight/obese (BMI>25 kg/m2) [HR 4.31], use of specialized liners [HR 5.51–10.71], lumbopelvic stiffness [HR 6.29], and postoperative abductor weakness [HR 7.20] were significant risk factors for recurrent dislocation. Increasing the cup size decreased the dislocation risk [HR 0.89]. The dual mobility construct did not affect the risk for recurrent dislocation in univariate or multivariable analyses. VR-12 physical and HHS (pain and function) scores improved postoperatively at midterm. Patients requiring revision THA for instability are at risk for recurrent dislocation. Higher ASA scores, abnormal BMI, use of special liners, lumbopelvic stiffness, and postoperative abductor weakness are significant risk factors for re-dislocation.
The American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) is the largest registry of total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) procedures performed in the U.S. The National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) is a public database containing demographic estimates based on more than seven million hospitalizations annually. The purpose of this study was to analyze whether AJRR data is representative of the national experience with TJA as represented in NIS Cohen's d effect sizes were computed to ascertain the magnitude of differences in demographics, hospital volume (in 50 patient increments), and geographic characteristics between the AJRR and NIS databases.Introduction
Methods
Instability is a common reason for revision after total knee arthroplasty. A balanced flexion gap is likely to enhance stability throughout the arc of motion. This is achieved differently by the gap balancing and measured resection techniques. Given similar clinical results with the two techniques, one would expect similar rotation of the femoral component in the axial plane. We assessed posterior-stabilized femoral component axial rotation placed with computer navigation and a modified gap balancing technique. We hypothesized that there would be little variation in rotation. 90 surgeons from 8 countries used a modified gap-balancing technique and the same posterior-stabilized implant for this retrospective study. Axial rotation of the femoral component was collected from a navigation system and reported relative to the posterior condylar line. Patients were stratified by their preoperative coronal mechanical alignment (≥ 3° varus, < 3° varus to < 3° valgus, and ≥ 3° valgus).Introduction
Methods
Patients with FNF may be treated by either total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA). Utilizing American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) data, we aimed to evaluate outcomes in FNF treatment. Medicare patients with FNF treated with HA or THA reported to the AJRR database from 2012–2019 and CMS claims data from 2012–2017 were analyzed in this retrospective cohort study. “Early” was defined as less than 90 days from index procedure. A logistic regression model, including index arthroplasty, age, sex, stem fixation method, hospital size1, hospital teaching affiliation1, and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), was utilized to determine associations between index procedure and revision rates.Introduction
Methods
In November 2017, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized the 2018 Medicare Outpatient Prospective Payment System rule that removed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures from the Medicare inpatient-only (IPO) list of procedures. This action had significant and unexpected consequences. For several years, CMS has utilized a rule called the “Two-Midnight Rule” to define outpatient status for all procedures not on the IPO list. CMS made TKA subject to the “Two-Midnight Rule” in conjunction with the decision to move TKA off the IPO list. According to the “Two-Midnight Rule,” a hospital admission should be expected to span at least two midnights in order to be covered as an inpatient procedure. If it can be reliably expected that the patient will not require at least two midnights in the hospital, the “Two-Midnight Rule” suggests that the patient is considered an outpatient and is therefore subject to outpatient payment policies. Under prior guidance related to the “Two-Midnight Rule;” however, CMS also states that Medicare We looked at 3 different levels of the IPO rule impact on TKA for Medicare beneficiaries: a national comparison of fee for service (FFS) inpatient and outpatient classification for 2017 vs 2018; a survey of AAHKS surgeons completed in April of 2019; and an in-depth analysis of a large academic medical center experience. An analysis of change in inpatient classification of TKA patients over time, number of Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) audits, compliance solutions of organizations for the new rule and cost implications of those compliance solutions were evaluated.Introduction
Methods
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) removed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) from inpatient-only status in 2018. Our goal was to measure the adoption of outpatient TKAs, the impact on re-treatment rates, and the economic implications for hospitals. We utilized 100% national Medicare Part A fee-for-service (FFS) patient-level claims data for 2017–2018. We excluded DRG 469 TKAs since they are unlikely to be outpatient candidates, which left 257,107 primary TKAs in 2017 and 264,393 in 2018. We examined the time trend in monthly case volume and 30-day retreatment rate (defined as percent of patients having a second TKA within 30 days of the first. We calculated the loss in revenue for a hospital by multiplying the decrease in payment rate between inpatient and outpatient by the outpatient and total 2018 TKA volume.Introduction
Methods
Meaningful clinical improvement as demonstrated through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to evaluate success of total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures. This patient perspective can provide a full picture when used with clinical data to best evaluate surgical outcomes. All primary THA procedures reported to the American Joint Replacement Registry from 2012–2018 with linked pre-operative and 1-year post-operative functional or anatomical PROMs were included. The achievement of minimal clinically-important difference (MCID) was calculated using the distribution method. Logistic regression models with covariate adjustment for patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and body mass index (BMI) were constructed to identify associations with PROMs. Results were analyzed based on hospital size (small, medium and large) and teaching type (non-teaching, minor and major) based on the American Hospital Association Survey (2015).Introduction
Methods
Within the field of arthroplasty, the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is becoming increasingly ubiquitous in an effort to employ more patient-centered methods of evaluating success. PROMs may be used to assess general health, joint-specific pain or function, or mental health. General and joint-specific questionnaires are most often used in arthroplasty research, but the relationship between arthroplasty and mental health is less well understood. Furthermore, longitudinal reports of PROM changes after arthroplasty are lacking in the literature. Our primary aim was to quantify the improvement in general, joint-specific, and mental health PROMs following total hip arthroplasty (THA) as well as the extent of any deterioration through the 7 years follow-up. Our secondary aim was to identify predictors of clinically significant PROM decline. A total of 864 patients from 17 centers across 8 countries were enrolled into a prospective study. Patients were treated with components from a single manufacturer, which have been shown to be well-functioning in other studies. Patients completed a battery of PROMs preoperatively, and at one, three, five, and seven years post-THA. Changes in PROMs between study visits were assessed via paired tests. Postoperative trends for each PROM were determined for each subject by the slope of the best-fit line of the four postoperative data points. Significant PROM deterioration was defined as one literature-defined minimum clinically important difference over 5-years. Binary logistic regressions were used to identify independent predictors of significant decline in the EuroQol (EQ-5D) visual analogue scale (VAS) for Health State, 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) physical composite summary (PCS), and SF-36 mental composite summary (MCS).Introduction
Methods
The goal of the current study was to determine if SES affects PROMs in patients treated with THA. Specifically, we sought to determine any potential differences between low and high SES patients in pre-surgical PROMs, post-surgical PROMs, and PROM improvement after surgery while controlling for any potential confounding demographic factors. Patients were selected from a clinical registry at an urban tertiary academic medical center. All patients undergoing primary THA between January 1, 2000 and April 1, 2016 were eligible for this study. During this period, patients were asked to complete the Harris Hip Score (HHS), Euro-QoL 5 Dimension (EQ-5D), 0–10 Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Pain, 0–10 NRS Satisfaction (only given postoperatively), the Charnley Classifier, and the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Score. To determine SES, patients were matched by zip code to corresponding median household income as reported by the United States Census Bureau. Patients were then dichotomized into low and high SES groups using 2016 median household income of $57,617 USD as a cutoff point. Statistical differences between low and high SES patients were determined for demographic factors, preoperative PROMs, postoperative PROMs, and PROM change. Non-parametric variables were tested with the Mann Whitney U test and categorical variables were tested with the Chi squared test. Multivariate models were created to determine if SES group was independently predictive of achieving a minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) in PROMs (18.0 for HHS, −2.0 for NRS Pain, and 0.92 for UCLA). As potential confounders, we tested body mass index (BMI), preoperative health state from EQ-5D visual analog scale (EQ VAS), age at surgery, preoperative Charnley class, sex, and time between PROMs.Introduction
Methods
