Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a complex procedure which carries both a greater risk for patients and greater cost for the treating hospital than does a primary TKA. As well as the increased cost of peri-operative investigations, blood transfusions, surgical instrumentation, implants and operating time, there is a well-documented increased length of stay which accounts for most of the actual costs associated with surgery.

We compared revision surgery for infection with revision for other causes (pain, instability, aseptic loosening and fracture). Complete clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 168 consecutive revision TKAs performed at a tertiary referral centre between 2005 and 2012.

Revision surgery for infection was associated with a mean length of stay more than double that of aseptic cases (21.5 vs 9.5 days, p < 0.0001). The mean cost of a revision for infection was more than three times that of an aseptic revision (£30 011 (sd 4514) vs £9655 (sd 599.7), p < 0.0001).

Current NHS tariffs do not fully reimburse the increased costs of providing a revision knee surgery service. Moreover, especially as greater costs are incurred for infected cases. These losses may adversely affect the provision of revision surgery in the NHS.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:197–201.

Introduction. Bundled reimbursement models for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have resulted in an effort to decrease the cost of care. However, these models may incentivize bias in patient selection to avoid excess cost of care. We sought to determine the impact of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model at a single center. Methods. This is a retrospective review of primary TKA patients from July 2015-December 2017. Patients were stratified by whether or not their surgery was performed before or after implementation of the CJR bundle. Patient demographic data including age, sex, and BMI were collected in addition to Elixhauser comorbidities and ASA score. In-hospital outcomes were then examined including surgery duration, length of stay, discharge disposition, and direct cost of care. Results. 1,248 TKA patients (546 Medicare and 702 Commercial Insurance) were evaluated, with 27.0% undergoing surgery prior to the start of the bundle. Compared to patients following implementation of the bundle, there was no significant difference in age, gender, or BMI. However, pre-CJR Medicare patients were more likely to have fewer Elixhauser comorbidities (p<0.001), prolonged length of stay (p<0.001), and greater discharges to inpatient facilities (p=0.019). There was no significant difference in direct hospital costs or operative service time comparing pre and post bundle patients. Conclusions. Implementation of the bundled reimbursement model did not result in biased patient selection at our institution; importantly, it also did not result in decreased hospital costs despite apparent improvement in value-based outcome metrics. This should be taken into consideration as future adaptations to reimbursement are made by CMS. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Abstract. Introduction. Approximately 15–20% of patients report chronic pain three months after total knee replacement (TKR). The STAR care pathway is a clinically important and cost-effective personalised intervention for patients with pain 3 months after TKR. The pathway comprises screening, assesment, onward referral for treatment and follow-up over one year. In a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the pathway with usual care, the pathway improved pain at 6 and 12 months. This study examined the longer-term clinical and cost-effectiveness of the STAR care pathway. Methodology. STAR trial participants were followed-up at a median of 4 years post-randomisation. Co-primary outcomes were self-reported pain severity and interference in the replaced knee, assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI). Resource use from electronic hospital records was valued with UK reference costs. Results. Of the 337 participants active at trial completion, 326 had confirmed vital status, and 226 (69%) provided outcome data at a median of 4 years. The between-group difference in mean BPI severity score was −0.42 (95% CI −1.07, 0.23; p=0.20) and for BPI interference was −0.64 (95% CI −1.41, 0.12; p=0.10), favouring the intervention. Multiple imputation analyses led to attenuations of about 0.2 points. Mean hospital admission costs over four years were £2461.49 (95% CI £1354.42, £3568.57) in the intervention arm and £3791.68 (95% CI £2095.12, to £5488.24) in usual care. Conclusion. These data are consistent with sustained benefits from the STAR care pathway at 4 years, albeit attenuated and with wider confidence intervals, in part attributable to attrition after 1 year

Background. There are advantages and disadvantages of Unicompartmental (UKR) and Total Knee Replacement, with UKR having better functional outcomes with fewer complications but a higher revision rate. The relative merits depend on patient characteristics. The aim was to compare UKR and TKR risk-benefits and cost-effectiveness in patients with severe systemic morbidity. Methods. Data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland was linked to hospital inpatient and patient-reported outcomes data. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade ≥3 undergoing UKR or TKR were identified. Propensity score stratification was used to compare 90-day complications and 5-year revision and mortality of 2,256 UKR and 57,682 TKR, and in a subset of 145 UKR and 23,344 TKR Oxford Knee Scores (OKS). A health-economic analysis was based on EQ-5D and NHS hospital costs. Results. The OKS was significantly better following UKR than TKR with a difference of 1.83 (95%CI 0.10–3.56). UKR was associated with lower relative risks of venous thromboembolism (0.33, CI0.15–0.74), myocardial infarction (0.73, CI0.36–1.45) and early joint infection (0.85, CI0.33–2.19) but only the decrease in venous thromboembolism was significant. The revision risk following UKR was significantly higher than following TKR (hazard ratio 2.70, CI2.15–3.38) and the mortality was significantly lower (0.52, CI0.36–0.74). At five years the cumulative incidence of revision was 8% higher with UKR, and the cumulative incidence of death was 13% lower. The health economic analysis found that UKR dominated TKR having lower costs (£359, CI340-378) and higher quality-of-life gains (0.33, CI-0.31–0.970). Conclusions. For patients with ASA ≥3, UKR was safer and more cost-effective than TKR. In particular if UKR was used instead of TKR the number of lives saved was higher than the number of extra revisions. UKR should be considered the first option for suitable patients with severe co-morbidity

Introduction. Cementless total knees were historically associated with early failure. These failures, likely associated with implant design, made cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) the “gold standard”. Manufacturers have introduced newer uncemented technologies that provide good initial stability and utilize a highly-porous substrates for bony in-growth. Outcome data on these implants has been limited. In addition, these implants typically have a price premium which makes them difficult to use in the setting of cost containment and in at risk 90-day bundles. Our purpose was to compare 90-day outcomes of a new uncemented implant with those of a comparable cemented implant from the same manufacturer. We hypothesized that the implants would have equivalent 90-day clinical and economic outcomes. Methods. Ninety-day clinical and economic outcomes for 252 patients with prospectively collected data from the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative (MARCQI) database were reviewed. Ninety-day outcomes were compared between uncemented knees and an age-matched group of cemented knees (Triathlon cemented vs uncemented Triathalon-tritanium, Stryker Orthopedics, Mahwah, NJ, USA). Both cruciate retaining and posterior stabilized designs were included. MARCQI data: demographics, co-morbidities, length of stay, complications, emergency department visits, discharge disposition, and readmissions were reviewed. Financial data provided by the hospital's finance department was used for economic comparisons. Fischer's test was done to assess categorical data and a student's t-test was used to compare numerical data. Results. Uncemented knees had shorter length of stay (1.58 vs. 1.87, p<0.0001), were more frequently discharged home (90.48% vs. 68.75%; p<0.0001) and used less home care or extended care facilities (6.35% vs. 19.14%, p<0.0001; 2.78% vs. 11.72%, p=0.0001). More uncemented knees had “no complications”. Moreover, there were no reoperations in uncemented knees, compared to 19 reoperations in cemented knees most being manipulations (14 vs. 0, p=0.0028). Uncemented knees scored better than age matched counterparts Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (63.69 vs. 47.10, n=85 and 43, p<0.0001), and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System T-physical and T-mental (44.12 vs. 39.45, n=95 and 59, p<0.0001; 51.84 vs 47.82, n=97 and 59, p=0.0018). Cemented cases were more expensive overall, the surgical costs were higher ($6806.43 vs. $5710.78 p<0.01) and the total hospital costs were higher ($8347.65 vs. $7016.11 p<0.01). The 90-day readmission and hospital outpatient costs were not significantly different between the designs. Conclusion. The use of a modern uncemented TKA implants has increased, but data on outcomes and the economic impact has been limited particularly in regard to 90-day at risk global periods. Our study suggests that patients receiving an new uncemented TKA have a shorter length of stay, higher rate of discharge to home, better patient reported outcome measures, fewer complications and fewer reoperations than an age-matched group of patients receiving a similar, cemented design during the 90-day global period. Importantly, the uncemented knees had $1,095 less surgical episode costs (p< 0.001) and a 90-day cost savings of over $1,300 (p< 0.001). Uncemented TKA, when utilizing modern technologies, is successful and economically viable for an at-risk bundle. The results of this study should alleviate fears increased cost, early failure, complications or poor outcomes with the use of a modern uncemented TKA

Introduction. The purpose of bundled payment programs is to reduce cost via risk sharing, while still maintaining quality. If savings are achieved under a historic target price, the orthopedic surgeon will receive a monetary bonus. If costs are higher, a portion is deducted from payment to the orthopedic surgeon. The purpose of this study was to evaluate our experience with the Bundled Payments for Care Improvement Program (BPCI) when run by an orthopedic surgeon group to determine patient safety and who benefited the most financially. Methods. This program ran from January 2015 through September 2018. 3,186 Medicare total hip and knee replacements, elective (DRG 470) and for fracture (DRG 469), performed by our group were included. 90 day hospital and all postoperative expenditures were reconciled against our historic cost. All patients were medically optimized with discharge plans established preoperatively. We developed preferred skilled nursing facilities and home health care agencies with synergistic medical providers so that discharges were recommended as soon as appropriate. We hired two full-time case managers to have direct contact with patients pre-and post-operatively. Waiver assistance such as house and pet sitters were used if necessary at our expense. 35% of savings went to the convener, who acted as a liaison between our group and CMS. Expenditures for the 90-day period for all patients were calculated to determine where savings occurred and which entity benefitted financially. Results. There was an average 9.2% reduction in hospital readmissions. An estimated total savings of $5,100,000 occurred. There was a 17% reduction in hospital costs, a 12.1% reduction in admissions to skilled nursing facilities with a 34% reduction in length of stay, and a 5% reduction in admissions to inpatient rehabilitation facilities. There was a 35% reduction in home health visits, but no change in outpatient physical therapy visits. After group expenses, final bonus to the orthopedic provider was on average $262 per patient. Conclusion. The physician managed program was very successful from Medicare's standpoint, achieving significant monetary savings without reducing quality of care. However, the bonus to the providing and managing physicians was nominal. It also does not take into consideration the 50 plus hours spent in meetings to develop this program. Participation could be considered a defensive posture so as not to lose more reimbursement. However, experience was gained which will be valuable for future gain sharing programs. Physicians and physician organizations need to sit at the head of the table to manage future payment bundles and perhaps also act as the convener. We deserve this, as a result of demonstrating high safety and cost savings. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Background. As the number of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) being performed continues to increase, the number of potential failures requiring revision surgery would also be expected to increase. This study analyzed the trends in revision TKA (rTKA) from 2009 to 2016. Methods. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was used to identify all rTKA by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. The diagnoses leading to revision, revision costs, patient and hospital characteristics, and major inpatient complications were compared between 2009 and 2016. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to calculate odds ratios (OR) for complications. Results. A total of 453,770 rTKA were performed between 2009 and 2016 (Table 1). The incidence of rTKA between 2009 and 2016 decreased by 4.3% among all age groups and decreased 5.9% in those over 65 years of age. The mean age at revision remained unchanged at 65 years, the mean Length of Stay (LOS) decreased 19.5% from 4.1 to 3.3 days (p<0.001), and the mean hospital costs increased 18.7% from $23,103 to $27,427 (p<0.001). Male to Female ratio remained unchanged with Females making up 58% of rTKA. The rTKA patients in 2016 versus 2009 had significantly lower odds of requiring a blood transfusion (OR 0.26, p<0.001). The rate of myocardial infarction remained unchanged in 2016 versus 2009 (4.1% vs. 4.0%, p=0.52), as did mortality (0.1% vs. 0.2%, p=0.089). Patients in 2016 were significantly less likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) (26.5% in 2016 vs. 31.6% in 2009, p<0.001). A significantly larger share of rTKA were performed in urban teaching hospitals in 2016 (66.6% in 2016 vs. 41.5% in 2009, p<0.001). Mechanical loosening remained the most common reason for rTKA and increased from 19.7% in 2009 to 28.4% in 2016. Infection remained the second most common reason for rTKA (14.7% in 2009 vs. 12.2% in 2016). Instability was the third most common reason for revision in 2016 (10.7%) but direct comparison with 2009 could not be made since ICD-9 did not include this diagnosis. When comparing 2009 to 2014, an increase in revision rates was noted. Upon inclusion of 2015 and 2016 data, a decrease is noted. The primary limitation of this study is the challenge faced when comparing results from before and after the October 2015 transition of ICD-9 to ICD-10 codes. Conclusions. The incidence of rTKA had decreased slightly between 2009 and 2016 even while the volume of primary TKA continued to rise. Implant loosening became increasingly prevalent as a reason for revision and infection continued to plague patients after TKA. Positive trends were noted, such as decreased rates of blood transfusion, LOS and rates of discharge to SNF. Still, the revision burden remains large, costing approximately $1.4 billion annually and we must continue to attempt to improve outcomes in this patient population. For figures, tables, or references, please contact authors directly

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in young patients aged under 45 years with traumatic meniscal tears.

Aims

To identify variables independently associated with same-day discharge (SDD) of patients following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and to develop machine learning algorithms to predict suitable candidates for outpatient rTKA.

Aims

Access to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is sometimes restricted for patients with severe obesity (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m²). This study compares the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) associated with TKA in patients with a BMI above and below 40 kg/m² to examine whether this is supported.

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare ten-year longitudinal healthcare costs and revision rates for patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Aims

The practice of alternating operating theatres has long been used to reduce surgeon idle time between cases. However, concerns have been raised as to the safety of this practice. We assessed the payments and outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed during overlapping and nonoverlapping days, also comparing the total number of the surgeon’s cases and the total time spent in the operating theatre per day.

Aims

The primary aim of the study was to compare the knee-specific functional outcome of robotic unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (rUKA) with manual total knee arthroplasty (mTKA) for the management of isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis. Secondary aims were to compare length of hospital stay, general health improvement, and satisfaction between rUKA and mTKA.

Aims

To evaluate the influence of discharge timing on 30-day complications following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Aims

The purpose of the present study was to compare patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) and conventional surgical instrumentation (CSI) for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in terms of early implant migration, alignment, surgical resources, patient outcomes, and costs.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of combined total joint arthroplasty (TJA) (total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) performed during the same admission) versus bilateral THA, bilateral TKA, single THA, and single TKA. Combined TJAs performed on the same day were compared with those staged within the same admission episode.

We prospectively followed 171 patients who underwent bilateral unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) over a period of two years. Of these, 124 (72.5%) underwent a simultaneous bilateral procedure and 47 (27.5%) underwent a staged procedure. The mean cumulative operating time and length of hospital stay were both shorter in the simultaneous group, by 22.5 minutes (p < 0.001) and three days (p < 0.001), respectively. The mean reduction in haemoglobin level post-operatively was greater by 0.15 g/dl in the simultaneous group (p = 0.023), but this did not translate into a significant increase in the number of patients requiring blood transfusion (p = 1.000). The mean hospital cost was lower by $8892 in the simultaneous group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the rate of complications between the groups, and at two-year follow-up there was no difference in the outcomes between the two groups.

We conclude that simultaneous bilateral UKR can be recommended as an appropriate treatment for patients with bilateral medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:788–92.

This review summarises the opinions and conclusions reached from a symposium on infected total knee replacement (TKR) held at the British Association of Surgery of the Knee (BASK) annual meeting in 2011. The National Joint Registry for England and Wales reported 5082 revision TKRs in 2010, of which 1157 (23%) were caused by infection. The diagnosis of infection beyond the acute post-operative stage relies on the identification of the causative organism by aspiration and analysis of material obtained at arthroscopy. Ideal treatment then involves a two-stage surgical procedure with extensive debridement and washout, followed by antibiotics. An articulating or non-articulating drug-eluting cement spacer is used prior to implantation of the revision prosthesis, guided by the serum level of inflammatory markers. The use of a single-stage revision is gaining popularity and we would advocate its use in certain patients where the causative organism is known, no sinuses are present, the patient is not immunocompromised, and there is no radiological evidence of component loosening or osteitis.

It is our opinion that single-stage revision produces high-quality reproducible results and will soon achieve the same widespread acceptance as it does in infected hip arthroplasty.

Patient specific cutting guides generated by preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the patient’s extremity have been proposed as a method of improving the consistency of Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) alignment and adding efficiency to the operative procedure. The cost of this option was evaluated by quantifying the savings from decreased operative time and instrument processing costs compared to the additional cost of the MRI and the guide. Coronal plane alignment was measured in an unselected consecutive series of 200 TKAs, 100 with standard instrumentation and 100 with custom cutting guides. While the cutting guides had significantly lower total operative time and instrument processing time, the estimated $322 savings was overwhelmed by the $1,500 additional cost of the MRI and the cutting guide. All measures of coronal plane alignment were equivalent between the two groups. The data does not currently support the proposition that patient specific guides add value to TKA.

In a prospective multicentre study we investigated variations in pain management used by knee arthroplasty surgeons in order to compare the differences in pain levels among patients undergoing total knee replacements (TKR), and to compare the effectiveness of pain management protocols. The protocols, peri-operative levels of pain and patient satisfaction were investigated in 424 patients who underwent TKR in 14 hospitals. The protocols were highly variable and peri-operative pain levels varied substantially, particularly during the first two post-operative days. Differences in levels of pain were greatest during the night after TKR, when visual analogue scores ranged from 16.9 to 94.3 points.

Of the methods of managing pain, the combined use of peri-articular infiltration and nerve blocks provided better pain relief than other methods during the first two post-operative days. Patients managed with peri-articular injection plus nerve block, and epidural analgesia were more likely to have higher satisfaction at two weeks after TKR. This study highlights the need to establish a consistent pain management strategy after TKR.