Aims. The Fluid Lavage in Open Fracture Wounds (FLOW) trial was a multicentre,
blinded, randomized controlled trial that used a 2 × 3 factorial
design to evaluate the effect of irrigation solution (soap versus normal
saline) and irrigation pressure (very low versus low versus high)
on health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with open fractures.
In this study, we used this dataset to ascertain whether these factors
affect whether HRQL returns to pre-injury levels at 12-months post-injury. Patients and Methods. Participants completed the Short Form-12 (SF-12) and the EuroQol-5
Dimensions (EQ-5D) at baseline (pre-injury recall), at two and six
weeks, and at three, six, nine and 12-months post-fracture. We calculated
the Physical Component Score (PCS) and the Mental Component Score
(MCS) of the SF-12 and the EQ-5D utility score, conducted an analysis
using a multi-level generalized linear model, and compared differences
between the baseline and 12-month scores. Results. We found no clinically important differences between irrigating
solutions or pressures for the SF-12 PCS, SF-12
The primary outcome was investigating differences in wear, as measured by femoral head penetration, between cross-linked vitamin E-diffused polyethylene (vE-PE) and cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) acetabular component liners and between 32 and 36 mm head sizes at the ten-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included acetabular component migration and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, Harris Hip Score, and University of California, Los Angeles Activity Scale (UCLA). A single-blinded, multi-arm, 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial was undertaken. Patients were recruited between May 2009 and April 2011. Radiostereometric analyses (RSAs) were performed from baseline to ten years. Of the 220 eligible patients, 116 underwent randomization, and 82 remained at the ten-year follow-up. Eligible patients were randomized into one of four interventions: vE-PE acetabular liner with either 32 or 36 mm femoral head, and XLPE acetabular liner with either 32 or 36 mm femoral head. Parameters were otherwise identical except for acetabular liner material and femoral head size.Aims
Methods
The most frequent indication for revision surgery in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is aseptic loosening. Aseptic loosening is associated with polyethylene liner wear, and wear may be reduced by using vitamin E-doped liners. The primary objective of this study was to compare proximal femoral head penetration into the liner between a) two cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) liners (vitamin E-doped (vE-PE)) versus standard XLPE liners, and b) two modular femoral head diameters (32 mm and 36 mm). Patients scheduled for a THA were randomized to receive a vE-PE or XLPE liner with a 32 mm or 36 mm metal head (four intervention groups in a 2 × 2 factorial design). Head penetration and acetabular component migration were measured using radiostereometric analysis at baseline, three, 12, 24, and 60 months postoperatively. The Harris Hip Score, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Score, EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) were assessed at baseline, three, 12, 36, and 60 months.Aims
Methods
The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic
outcomes of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) in patients with pre-operatively
moderate and severe arthritic varus ankles to those achieved for
patients with neutral ankles. A total of 105 patients (105 ankles), matched for age, gender,
body mass index, and follow-up duration, were divided into three
groups by pre-operative coronal plane tibiotalar angle; neutral
(<
5°), moderate (5° to 15°) and severe (>
15°) varus deformity.
American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot
score, a visual analogue scale (VAS), and Short Form (SF)-36 score
were used to compare the clinical outcomes after a mean follow-up period
of 51 months (24 to 147).Aims
Patients and Methods
To validate the English language Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12)
as a tool to evaluate the outcome of hip and knee arthroplasty in
a United Kingdom population. All patients undergoing surgery between January and August 2014
were eligible for inclusion. Prospective data were collected from
205 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 231 patients
undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Outcomes were assessed
with the FJS-12 and the Oxford Hip and Knee Scores (OHS, OKS) pre-operatively,
then at six and 12 months post-operatively. Internal consistency,
convergent validity, effect size, relative validity and ceiling
effects were determined.Aims
Patients and Methods
Satisfaction with care is important to both patients
and to those who pay for it. The Net Promoter Score (NPS), widely
used in the service industries, has been introduced into the NHS
as the ‘friends and family test’; an overarching measure of patient
satisfaction. It assesses the likelihood of the patient recommending
the healthcare received to another, and is seen as a discriminator
of healthcare performance. We prospectively assessed 6186 individuals
undergoing primary lower limb joint replacement at a single university
hospital to determine the Net Promoter Score for joint replacements
and to evaluate which factors contributed to the response. Achieving pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, confidence interval
(CI) 1.83 to 2.49), the meeting of pre-operative expectation (OR
2.57, CI 2.24 to 2.97), and the hospital experience (OR 2.33, CI
2.03 to 2.68) are the domains that explain whether a patient would
recommend joint replacement services. These three factors, combined
with the type of surgery undertaken (OR 2.31, CI 1.68 to 3.17),
drove a predictive model that was able to explain 95% of the variation
in the patient’s recommendation response. Though intuitively similar,
this ‘recommendation’ metric was found to be materially different
to satisfaction responses. The difference between THR (NPS 71) and
TKR (NPS 49) suggests that no overarching score for a department
should be used without an adjustment for case mix. However, the
Net Promoter Score does measure a further important dimension to
our existing metrics: the patient experience of healthcare delivery. Cite this article:
