Purpose. A comparison of patient satisfaction of service provided by independent sector treatment centres versus an index NHS hospital in total knee replacement surgery. Methods. Patients were all initially listed for total knee replacement (TKR) by a single consultant from the index NHS hospital, Derbyshire Royal Infirmary (DRI). Patients were sent a postal questionnaire and asked to rate the TKR service provided by a given hospital, based on recent inpatient experience. Questions covered quality of care delivered by hospital staff and quality of ward environment. Overall satisfaction was rated. Patients electing surgery under Patient Choice at an independent sector treatment centre (ISTC) were asked about factors that influenced their hospital choice. 100 consecutive patients undergoing TKR at DRI and 100 patients choosing ISTC hospitals were identified. All surgery occurred between April 2003 and September 2006. Results. Questionnaire response rates were 79% for DRI patients and 54% for ISTC. Overall patient satisfaction for TKR service was 95% for DRI and 87% for ISTC. An equal 61% rated the surgeons as excellent in both DRI and ISTC hospitals. Nurses and physiotherapists (& occupational therapists) both scored more highly in ISTC groups (Nurses 69% v 45%; physio/OT 57% v 35%). Ward environment rated excellent in 73% for ISTC and 24% for DRI. The most common reason for choosing ISTC was shorter waiting list (42%). Conclusion. ISTC hospitals scored more highly in terms of nurses, physiotherapy & occupational therapy, and ward environment. In part, this may arise from better staffing levels and newer facilities in the ISTC sector. Despite this, overall patient satisfaction for TKR service remained greater at the index NHS hospital. This suggests overall satisfaction depends on more complex factors than staff and ward environment. Further work is needed to compare objective clinical outcomes of TKR between hospital groups within the NHS

Independent sector treatment centres (ISTCs) were introduced in October 2003 in the United Kingdom in order to reduce waiting times for elective operations and to improve patient choice and experience. Many concerns have been voiced from several authorities over a number of issues related to these centres. One of these concerns was regarding the practice of ‘cherry-picking’. Trusts are paid according to ‘payment by results’ at national tariffs. The national tariff is an average of costs occurring in an average mix of patients. The assumption is that the higher the co-morbidities of the patients the more likely they are to consume a higher amount of resource and to require a longer length of stay. Cherry-picking may also affect the quality of training available to trainees. This audit was aimed at identifying if, and how much this practice occurs. It also identifies what affect this has on the case-load of patients left for the NHS hospitals. We looked at the number of co-morbidities amongst 198 consecutive patients undergoing hip and knee primary total arthroplasty at an ISTC, a district general hospital whose PCTs provide patient to the ISTC (Doncaster Royal Infirmary - DRI), and a district general hospital in the same area whose PCT did not provide choice at that time and who therefore did not send patients to the ISTC (Bassetlaw District General Hospital - BDGH). We found a statistically significant difference in the number of co-morbidities per patient at the ISTC compared with the DRI (1.23 vs. 2.05) and the ISTC compared with the BDGH (1.23 vs. 1.76). We were unable to show a statistically significant difference between the DRI and the BDGH. We conclude that cherry-picking does take place, and further work should be done to assess the impact on training and finance

Introduction. We conducted a study of 312 patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty in 2005. The aim was to identify the correlation between length of stay, ASA (American society of Anaesthesiologist) grade and BMI (Body Mass Index). Method and materials. 312 patients underwent hip and knee arthroplasty in 2005. ASA grade for surgery was documented by the anaesthetist and BMI by the nurses. 67 patients had inadequate documentation. SPSS software was used for analysis. Results. Of the 245 patients; 35 had ASA grade 1, 144 had ASA grade 2, 64 had ASA grade 3 and 2 had ASA grade 4. Mean length of stay for ASA grade 1 was 6.8 days, ASA grade 2 was 9.75 days, ASA grade 3 was 12.5 days and ASA grade 4 was 13.5 days. There was significant positive correlation (p < 0.01) between the ASA grade and post-operative length of stay. BMI was graded as I (<18.5), II (18.5-24.9), III (25-29.9) and IV (>30). There was no correlation (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.184) between BMI and post-operative length of stay. Conclusion. As the ASA grade increases the length of stay in hospital increases. ‘Cherry picking’ of ASA grade I and II patients by the ISTC will increase the average length of stay in NHS hospitals resulting in increased cost. Length of stay on its own is not a good indicator of hospital performance