Quality measures play a substantial role in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' hospital payment and public reporting programs. The purpose of this study was to assess whether public measurement of total hip and knee arthroplasty risk-standardized readmission (RSRRs) and complication rates (RSCRs) was temporally associated with decreasing rates of adverse outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries. We evaluated annual trends in hospital-level risk-standardized complication and readmission rates in the fiscal years 2010–11 and 2016–17 for patients undergoing hospital-based inpatient hip/knee replacement procedures. We calculated hospital-level rates using the same measures and methodology used in public reporting. We examined annual trends in the distribution of hospital-level outcomes through density plots (similar to histograms).Introduction
Methods
Infection following total knee arthroplasty is a devastating complication, requiring considerable effort on the part of the surgeon to eradicate the infection and restore joint function. Two-stage revision is the standard of care in the treatment of peri-prosthetic infection, using a temporary antibiotic-impregnated spacer between procedures. However, controversy remains concerning the use of static versus dynamic spacers, as well as the spacer material. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and complications of two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty in patients treated with a metal-on-polyethylene articulating spacer, as compared to those treated with a static antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer at the same centre. Twenty-seven knees in patients with a mean age of 65 years (range, 40 to 80 years) were treated with two-stage revision of an infected total knee arthroplasty using a metal-on-polyethylene dynamic prosthetic spacer fixed with antibiotic-impregnated cement. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using maximum active knee range of motion, as well as modified Knee Society knee scores and incidence of re-infection at a minimum one-year follow-up. The results were compared to those achieved at similar follow-up in 10 patients treated with a static cement spacer. Demographic profile as measured by age and gender, and pre-operative Knee Society scores and range of motion were similar between the two groups.Purpose
Method
Currently, there are no generally accepted treatments for the prevention of osteonecrosis. To compound this further, despite considerable research efforts, the natural history of this disease remains poorly understood. The disease process appears to be initially asymptomatic, but after symptoms appear, the course becomes rapidly progressive. Clinical studies have shown that, if left untreated, collapse of the femoral head will occur in 80 per cent of the cases or greater within four years. As our knowledge of the etiology and pathogenesis of osteonecrosis improves, new treatments to halt, or at least impede, the progression of the disease may be possible. Achieving the best outcomes in the treatment of osteonecrosis depends on early, accurate diagnosis, and prompt treatment appropriate for the stage of the disease. In many cases, if treated early, long-term preservation of the native joint is possible. Magnetic resonance imaging allows accurate diagnosis in even the earliest asymptomatic stages of the disease. Non-surgical treatments such as pharmacological agents have shown promise in experimental studies, although further work remains before they are appropriate for widespread use. Various hip salvaging procedures such as core decompression, percutaneous drilling, non-vascularized and vascularized bone grafting, and various osteotomies have been successful in the majority of properly selected patients over follow-up times of a decade or more. Advances in arthroplasty technologies and techniques, including hip resurfacing and modern cementless total hip arthroplasty have allowed patients to return to pain-free, active lifestyles with excellent long-term prosthesis survival. Current treatments for osteonecrosis, while generally successful, focus on halting or delaying the progression of symptomatic disease. Recent discoveries concerning the relationship between genetic factors and the development of osteonecrosis, as well as the pathophysiologic effects of various indirect and direct risk factors such as corticosteroid use and sickle cell disease, continue to improve our understanding of the underlying disease process. While these discoveries are promising, we must continue to work towards the goal of being able to identify and treat the precursors of osteonecrosis before it progresses to symptomatic disease and threatens the survival of native joints.