Introduction: Misalignment of total knee replacement components is one of the reasons for early loosening and revision surgery. Several studies have shown that using CAS (computer assisted surgery) there is a more precise positioning of the implants. So far only studies have reported about the costs of CAS. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the cost of CAS for an orthopaedic unit.

Method: For analysing the costs per operation we had to include the hip resurfacing procedures as for this operative procedure CAS is used. We therefore included in our retrospective analysis 200 TKR (100 CAS, 100 conventional) as well as 60 hip resurfacing operations (30 CAS, 30 conventional). We recorded the operation time, costs for single use material, costs for man power and the leasing costs for the CAS unit.

Results: The operation time in the CAS group was prolonged (average 15 minutes). This produced extra costs of 75€. Single use equipment costs were calculated with 89€/operation. The leasing costs were 290€/operation. There was less blood loss in the CAS group with a reduced need for transfusion saving 12€/operation. Including costs for operation staff and the leasing costs we had overall costs of 442€/operation in comparison to the conventional operated group. The rate of complications was not increased using CAS.

Conclusion: Using CAS our orthopaedic unit had to spend 442€/operation for using this technique. We obtained a better alignment of the implants in both CAS groups (knee and hip) and had less blood loss. Still there is no proof that better alignment will reduce the rate of revisions and will increase the lifetime of implants.

A number of studies suggest revision of unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) to total knee replacement (TKR) is straightforward. We hypothesise that this is not always the case in terms of complexity, cost and clinical outcome.

We identified 23 consecutive patients revised from UKR to TKR by 2 consultant surgeons (2005–2008). These were matched by age, sex and comorbidity to a cohort of primary TKRs (42 patients) performed during the same period. Data were collected regarding demographics, cost (surgical time & implants) and 1 & 5-year follow-up of clinical outcome (OKS) and outpatients attended.

There was no statistically significant difference in cost of implants for revision UKR to TKR vs. primary TKR (p=0.08), however operative time was significantly higher in the revision group. One year mean OKS was significantly higher in the primary TKR group (mean 30 vs. 23 p=0.03), but 5-year follow up showed no significant difference (mean OKS 27 vs. 32 p=0.20). The revision group had statistically significantly greater number of follow-up appointments (mean 6 Vs. 2 p<0.0001).

Revision of UKR to TKR is not a universally straightforward procedure, carrying significant overall cost implications. Clinical outcomes, although significantly different at 1 year are almost the same at 5 years.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of treatment with an osseointegrated percutaneous (OI-) prosthesis and a socket-suspended (S-) prosthesis for patients with a transfemoral amputation.

Complications such as implant loosening, infection, periprosthetic fracture or instability may lead to revision arthroplasty procedures. There is limited literature comparing single-stage and two-stage revision shoulder arthroplasty. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and cost benefit between single-stage and two-stage revision procedures. Thirty-one revision procedures (mean age 72+/-7, 15 males and 16 females) performed between 2016 and 2021 were included (27 revision RSA, 2 revision TSA, 2 failed ORIFs). Two-stage procedures were carried out 4-6 weeks apart. Single-stage procedures included debridement, implant removal and washout, followed by re-prep, re-drape and reconstruction with new instrumentations. Clinical parameters including length of stay, VAS, patient satisfaction was recorded preoperatively and at mean 12-months follow up. Cost benefit analysis were performed. Seven revisions were two-stage procedures and 24 were single-stage procedures. There were 5 infections in the two-stage group vs 14 in the single-stage group. We noted two cases of unstable RSA and 8 other causes for single-stage revision. Majority of the revisions were complex procedures requiring significant glenoid and/or humeral allografts and tendon transfers to compensate for soft tissue loss. No custom implants were used in our series. Hospital stay was reduced from 41+/-29 days for 2-stage procedures to 16+/-13 days for single-stage (p<0.05). VAS improved from 9+/-1 to 2+/-4 for two-stage procedures and from 5+/-3 to 1+/-2 for single-stages. The average total cost of hospital and patient was reduced by two-thirds. Patient satisfaction in the single-stage group was 43% which was comparable to the two-stage group. All infections were successfully treated with no recurrence of infection in our cohort of 31 patients. There was no instability postoperatively. 3 patients had postoperative neural symptoms which resolved within 6 months. Single-stage procedures for revision shoulder arthroplasty significantly decrease hospital stay, improve patients’ satisfaction, and reduced surgical costs

The purpose of this prospective pilot study is to examine the feasibility of a physiotherapist led rapid access shoulder screening clinic (RASC). The goal of this study is to assess for improvements in patient access to care, patient reported outcome measures, patient reported experience measures, and cost outcomes using time driven activity based costing methods. Patient recruitment began in January 2021. Consultation requests from general practitioners and emergency rooms are analyzed and triaged through a central system. One half of patients awaiting consultation were triaged to the traditional route used at our center while the other half were triaged to be assessed at the RASC. Outcome measures consisting of the Simple Shoulder Test and SF-12 were recorded at the initial consultation and at follow up appointments. Cost benefit analysis was conducted using time driven activity based costing methods (TD-ABC). From January to August of 2021, 123 new patients were triaged for RASC assessment. On average, the RASC gets 10 new referrals per month. As of September 2021, there are 65 patients still on waitlist for RASC assessment with 58 having been assessed. Of the 58, 11% were discharged through the RASC, 48% pursued private physiotherapy, 14% had injections, 19% proceeded on for surgical consultation, and 8% did not show. Over time same time period, approximately 15 new patients were seen in consultation by the surgeon's office. Thirty-five responses were obtained from RASC patients during their initial intake assessment. The average age of respondents was 54.7 with 21 females and 14 males. Median SF-12 scores in the physical dimension (PCS-12) for RASC patients were 36.82 and mental (MCS-12) 49.38927. Median Simple Shoulder Test scores measured 6. Of the patients who responded to the follow up questionnaires after completing physiotherapy at the RASC, both the SF-12 and Simple Shoulder Test scoring improved. Median PCS-12 measured 47.08, MCS-12 of 55.87, and Simple Shoulder Test measured 8. RASC assessments by PT saved $172.91 per hour for consultation and $157.97 per hour for patient follow ups. Utilization of a physiotherapy led rapid access shoulder clinic resulted in improvements in patient outcomes as measured by the SF-12 and Simple Shoulder Test as well as significant direct cost savings. Proper triage protocols to identify which patients would be suitable for RASC assessment, buy-in from physiotherapists, and timely assessment of patients for early initiation of rehabilitation for shoulder pain is paramount to the success of a RASC system at our centre. Future research direction would be geared to analyzing a larger dataset as it becomes available

Introduction: The use of mini C-arm systems has become established in hand surgery. Potential advantages of the mini C-arm include decreased radiation exposure by reducing screening time, increased distance from the beam, tighter beam collimation and surgeon control of the C-arm. Little has been written in the literature regarding their use in foot and ankle surgery. Aims: To compare the radiation dose and screening times delivered by the mini C-arm with standard fluoroscopy in elective foot and ankle surgical procedures. A secondary objective was to quantify the cost of both techniques. Patients and methods: We prospectively studied 137 patients who underwent fluoroscopic screening during various elective foot and ankle procedures. Of these 72 were screened using standard fluoroscopy and the remaining 55 using the mini C-arm. During each procedure screening time and radiation dose were prospectively recorded. The Dose Area Product (DAP) meters on both machines for the determination of radiation exposure and scatter to the operating theatre and staff were used. A cost benefit analysis for radiographer attendance and theatre delay was calculated. Results: The mean DAP for standard fluoroscopy was 7.43 CGycm2 (sd 9.41) whereas with the mini C-arm it was 3.46 CGycm2 (sd 3.51). There was a statistically significant reduction in the DAP (P = 0.0013). Mean screening time was 13 seconds (SD 14.7) with standard fluoroscopy and 14.5 seconds (SD 18.1) with the mini C-arm. No statistically significant difference was found between screening times. (p = 0.987). The potential total saving of the mini c-arm for 137 procedures was £4086. Conclusion: We recommend the use of the mini C-arm in foot and ankle surgery as it reduces radiation exposure and cost when compared to standard fluoroscopy. We acknowledge that there is a learning curve for surgeons to minimise screening time

Background: Screening modalities in early detection of DDH remain controversial worldwide despite of universal accessibility to ultrasound and despite of encouraging preliminary results reported about the Austrian and German general ultrasound screening programs. The goal of our investigations was to provide a long time survey on effects following the introduction of the ultrasound exam in prevention of DDH and to proof its beneficial medical and economic effects as well as to analyze possible adverse effects, when utilized by a general screening. Method: Nationwide data about ultrasound screening exams, sonographic follow up exams, frequencies of functional abductive treatment measures as well as hospitalizations due to DDH were requested by different Austrian health care providers. Through a representative recall over a time frame ranging partially back to 1980 a surveillance analysis is provided. The medical effectiveness of the screening was mainly assessed by the annual appearance of early late cases, representing open reductions (O.R.) upon the first two years of life. Other variables as the disease related incidence of age matched annual hospitalizations and the disease prevalence measured by non age matched hospitalizations in relation to the year specific population were analyzed. A cost benefit analysis was performed by comparing the treatment and diagnostic costs in the year before program start (1991) to the last year of surveillance (2004). Results: Since 1980 the functional treatment rate has continuously been reduced from approximately 12 percent to 3.23 percent in 2004. Early late cases (O.R.) due to DDH have been also diminished to an international competitive rate of 0.13 per 1000 newborns, while other age specific early surgical interventions could be almost eradicated. Current additional investments of the program figure only 16.94 € per newborn and embody approximately 1370 € per detection of one affected newborn. Control exams are contributing to roughly 25% of the calculated costs. Interpretation: By founding a nationwide program Austria has introduced a medically efficient screening modality to reduce early late cases and to limit treatment of DDH exposed children to less invasive measures by early diagnosis. In contrary to suspicions of possible adverse effects of such screening, overtreatment has been abandoned while the functional treatment rate has sunken to an acceptable level. Costs saving effects have been already realized on the treatment side. Further savings shall be realized by limiting an unacceptable rate of control exams