header advert
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 95-B, Issue SUPP_1 | Pages 35 - 35
1 Jan 2013
Williams D Price A Beard D Hadfield S Arden N Murray D Field R
Full Access

Objectives

This study examines variations in knee arthroplasty patient reported outcome measures according to patient age.

Methods

We analysed prospectively collected outcome data (OKS, Eq5D, satisfaction, and revision) on 2456 primary knee arthroplasty patients. Patients were stratified into defined age groups (< 55, 55–64, 65–74, 75–84, and ≥85 years). Oxford Knee Score and Eq5D were analysed pre-operatively, and postoperatively at 6 months and 2 years. Absolute scores and post-operative change in scores were calculated and compared between age groups. Satisfaction scores (0–100) were analysed at 6 months post-operatively. Linear, logistic and ordinal regression modelling was used to describe the association between age and outcomes, for continuous, binary and ordinal outcomes, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to describe revision rates at 2 years.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXIX | Pages 262 - 262
1 Sep 2012
Alazzawi S Hadfield S Bardakos N Field R
Full Access

Introduction

The outcomes programme of our institution has been developed from a system first used at Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust 15 years ago. The system was implemented at our institution when it opened in 2004, and has been used to collect data on over 17,000 joint replacement operations so far. A bespoke database is used to collect, analyse and report outcome data.

Methods

An integrated system allows the collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS), patient satisfaction scores, radiological assessment, and medical or surgical complications. Functionality allows the transfer of data from existing clinical management programmes, and the generation of customised letters and questionnaires to send to patients. Analysis of data and report production is fully automated. Data is collected pre-operatively, during the inpatient stay, and post-operatively at 6 weeks, 6, 12 and 24 months. Results are disseminated to the surgeons, the senior management team and the Clinical Governance Committee.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXIX | Pages 263 - 263
1 Sep 2012
Buly J Hadfield S Bardakos N Field R
Full Access

Introduction

The need for the stringent surveillance of new devices was recognised by the NICE review of hip replacement surgery in 2000 and led to the Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) developing criteria for post-marketing surveillance (PMS) studies. This requirement has been reinforced by the recent recall of ASR devices.

Methods

The South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre's (EOC's) comprehensive outcomes programme has been adapted to manage and coordinate multi-centre, multi-surgeon, PMS studies. The system allows any schedule and combination of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS), clinical and radiological assessments, and complications to be collected. Typically, PROMS are collected pre-operatively and yearly by post. Baseline clinical assessment is undertaken pre-operatively, with baseline radiological assessments pre- and post-operatively. Subsequent clinical and radiological assessments are usually obtained at the ODEP-mandated time points of 3, 5, 7 and 10 years post-operatively. Patients are telephoned twice yearly to document complications and any impending change of address.