The objectives of our study were to compare patient reported outcome measures between manual and robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty.

Between 1st May 2021 and 31st August 2022, 539 consecutive patients who underwent 564 primary total hip arthroplasties were identified from the local registry database. Data were prospectively collected, and included patient demographics, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, surgical approach, robotic-assistance, Oxford Hip Score (OHS), EQ-5D-3L and EQ-VAS pre-operatively and at twelve months.

Robotic-assistance, compared against manual total hip arthroplasty, was associated with an enhanced median (interquartile range) OHS (46 [42 – 48] vs 43 [36 – 47], p-value < 0.001), EQ-5D-3L (5 [5 – 7] vs 6 [5 – 8], p-value 0.002), and EQVAS (90 [75 – 95] vs 80 [70 – 90], p-value 0.003) at twelve months after surgery. Robotic-assistance was confirmed to be an independent predictor of a greater OHS at twelve months on a multivariate linear regression analysis (p-value 0.001).

Robotic assistance was superior to manual total hip arthroplasty in enhancing patient reported outcomes at twelve months after surgery.

Our unit historically performed total hip replacement (THR) through either posterior or anterolateral approaches. In November 2020 a group of 5 consultants transitioned to utilising the Direct Anterior Approach (DAA). Appropriate training was undertaken and cases were performed as dual consultant procedures with intraoperative radiography or robotic assistance.

Outcomes were collated prospectively. These included basic demographics, intraoperative details, complication rates and Oxford Hip Scores.

A total of 48 patients underwent DAA THR over 1 year. Mean age was 67 and ASA 2. Over this time period 140 posterior approach and 137 anterolateral approach THR's were performed with available data. Propensity score matching was performed on a 1:1 basis using BMI, Age, Sex and ASA as covariates to generate a matched cohort group of conventional approach THR (n=37)

Length of stay was significantly reduced at 1.95 days (p<0.001) with DAA compared to Anterolateral and Posterior approach. There was no significant difference with length of surgery, blood loss, Infection, dislocation and periprosthetic fracture rate. There was no significant difference in Oxford Hip Score between any approach at 3 months or 1 year.

The transition to this approach has not made a negative impact despite its associated steep learning curve, and has improved efficiency in elective surgery. From our experience we would suggest those changing to this approach receive appropriate training in a high-volume centre, and perform cases as dual consultant procedures.

One potential approach to addressing the current hip and knee arthroplasty backlog is via adoption of surgical prioritisation methods, such as use of pre-operative health related quality of life (HRQOL) assessment. We set out to determine whether dichotomization using a previously identified bimodal EuroQol Five-Dimension (EQ-5D) distribution could be used to triage waiting lists.

516 patients had data collected regarding demographics, perioperative variables and patient reported outcome measures (pre-operative & 1-year post-operative EQ-5D-3L and Oxford Hip and Knee Scores (OHS/OKS). Patients were split into two equal groups based on pre-operative EQ-5D Time Trade-Off (TTO) scores and compared (Group1 [worse HRQOL] = −0.239 to 0.487; Group2 [better HRQOL] = 0.516 to 1 (best)). The EQ5D TTO is a widely used and validated HRQOL measure that generates single values for different combinations of health-states based upon how individuals compare x years of healthy living to x years of illness.

We identified that those in Group1 had significantly greater improvement in post-operative EQ-5D TTO scores compared to Group2 (Median 0.67vs.0.19; p<0.0001 respectively), as well as greater improvement in OHS/OKS (Mean 22.4vs16.4; p<0.0001 respectively). Those in Group2 were significantly less likely to achieve EQ-5D MCID attainment (OR 0.13, 95%CI 0.07–0.23; p<0.0001) with a trend towards lower OHS/OKS MCID attainment (OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.37–1.19; p=0.168). There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events.

These finding suggest that a pre-operative EQ-5D cut-off of ≤0.487 for hip and knee arthroplasty prioritisation may help to maximise clinical utility and cost-effectiveness in a limited resource setting post COVID-19.