A novel enhanced cement fixation (EF) tibial implant with deeper cement pockets and a more roughened bonding surface was released to market for an existing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) system.This randomized controlled trial assessed fixation of the both the EF (ATTUNE S+) and standard (Std; ATTUNE S) using radiostereometric analysis. Overall, 50 subjects were randomized (21 EF-TKA and 23 Std-TKA in the final analysis), and had follow-up visits at six weeks, and six, 12, and 24 months to assess migration of the tibial component. Low viscosity bone cement with tobramycin was used in a standardized fashion for all subjects. Patient-reported outcome measure data was captured at preoperative and all postoperative visits.Aims
Methods
Instability is a common cause of failure after total hip arthroplasty. A novel reverse total hip has been developed, with a femoral cup and acetabular ball, creating enhanced mechanical stability. The purpose of this study was to assess the implant fixation using radiostereometric analysis (RSA), and the clinical safety and efficacy of this novel design. Patients with end-stage osteoarthritis were enrolled in a prospective cohort at a single centre. The cohort consisted of 11 females and 11 males with mean age of 70.6 years (SD 3.5) and BMI of 31.0 kg/m2 (SD 5.7). Implant fixation was evaluated using RSA as well as Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Harris Hip Score, Oxford Hip Score, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, 38-item Short Form survey, and EuroQol five-dimension health questionnaire scores at two-year follow-up. At least one acetabular screw was used in all cases. RSA markers were inserted into the innominate bone and proximal femur with imaging at six weeks (baseline) and six, 12, and 24 months. Independent-samples Aims
Methods
Current practice requires all post-operative hip and knee arthroplasty patients complete a series of clinical questionnaires at each visit. The patients responses to these questionnaires are used as a clinical evaluation tool for the surgeons to assess functionality, satisfaction and pain at routine pre and post-operative visits. The recent installation of 4 touch screen computer terminals, located in the patient waiting area, has created the opportunity to have the patients complete these questionnaires by using only the touch screen entry system. This eliminates the need for clinic staff to manually enter the patients responses into the clinics database, eliminate potential data entry errors, and will significantly reduce the amount of time and paper required to prepare questionnaires for each patient. In addition to possibly increasing the volume of data we can collect in our clinic, this also allows the surgeon to have immediate access to the patients responses which can be reviewed prior to seeing the patient in the office. Our goal was to determine the overall level of patient satisfaction with using the new touch screen direct entry system, the efficiency of completion and the quality of data entry occurring from the direct entry system. During the month of April, 2010, a consecutive series of 100 patients entering the orthopaedic clinic, were directed to the touch screen kiosks to complete the required questionnaires (SF-12, Oxford Knee/Hip, Harris Hip/Knee Society Score, and the Patient Satisfaction Survey). Once the patients completed the touch screen questionnaires they were asked to complete a paper copy of the Touch Screen Satisfaction Questionnaire. This questionnaire asked 6 questions regarding their satisfaction with the touch-screen system, the ease/difficulty of use, and which method they would prefer to complete such questionnaires if given a choice.Purpose
Method
Despite being matched by age, gender and modified Charnley classification, there were significant differences in post-operative functional scores. The revision TKR group’s mean WOMAC score was 73 (SD 17), compared to the primary group’s mean score of 84 (SD 14), p=0.002. Similarly, the revision group’s mean SF-12 PCS score was 35 (SD 8) compared to the primary group’s superior score of 44 (SD 10), p<
0.0001. There was no differences detected in post-operative SF-12 mental component scores; 49 (SD 12) for the revision group compared to 53 (SD 10) for the primary group, p=0.11.