The National Health Service produces over 500,000 tonnes of waste and 25 mega tonnes of CO2 annually. Operating room waste is segregated into different streams which are recycled, disposed of in landfill sites, or undergo costly and energy-intensive incineration processes. By assessing the quantity and recyclability of waste from primary hip and knee arthroplasty cases, we aim to identify strategies to reduce the carbon footprint of arthroplasty surgery. Data was collected prospectively at a tertiary orthopaedic hospital, in the theatres of six arthroplasty surgeons between April – July 2022. Fifteen primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 16 primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cases were included; revision and complex primary cases were excluded. Waste was categorised into non-hazardous waste, hazardous waste, recycling, sharps, and linens. Each waste category was weighed. Items disposed as non-hazardous waste were catalogued for a sample of 10 TKA and 10 THA cases. Recyclability of items was determined from packaging. Average total waste generated for THA and TKA were 14.46kg and 17.16kg respectively, with TKA generating significantly greater waste (p < 0.05). On average only 5.4% of waste was recycled in TKA and just 2.9% in THA cases. The mean recycled waste was significantly greater in TKA cases compared to THA, 0.93kg and 0.42kg respectively (p < 0.05). Hazardous waste represented the largest proportion of the waste streams for both TKA (69.2%) and THA (73.4%). On average TKA generated a significantly greater amount (11.87kg) compared to THA (10.61kg), p < 0.05. Non-hazardous waste made up 15.1% and 11.3% of total waste for TKA and THA respectively. In the non-hazardous waste, only two items (scrub brush packaging and sterile towel packaging) were identified as recyclable based on packaging. We estimate that annually total hip and knee arthroplasty generates over 2.7 million kg of waste in the UK. Through increased use of recyclable plastics for packaging, combined with clear labelling of items as recyclable, medical suppliers can significantly reduce the carbon footprint of arthroplasty. Our data highlight only a very small percentage of waste is recycled in total hip and knee arthroplasty cases

Follow-up of arthroplasty varies widely across the UK. The aim of this NIHR-funded study was to employ a mixed-methods approach to examine the requirements for arthroplasty follow-up and produce evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations. It has been supported by BHS, BASK, BOA, ODEP and NJR. Four interconnected work packages have recently been completed: (1) a systematic literature review; (2a) analysis of routinely collected National Health Service data from four national data sets to understand when and which patients present for revision surgery; (2b) prospective data regarding how patients currently present for revision surgery; (3) economic modelling to simulate long-term costs and quality-adjusted life years associated with different follow-up care models and (4) a Delphi-consensus process, involving all stakeholders, to develop a policy document to guide appropriate follow-up care after primary hip and knee arthroplasty. We will present the following Recommendations:. For ODEP10A∗ minimum implants, it is safe to disinvest in routine follow-up from 1 to 10 years post non-complex hip and knee replacement provided there is rapid access to orthopaedic review. For ODEP10A∗ minimum implants in complex cases, or non-ODEP10A∗ minimum implants, periodic follow-up post hip and knee replacement may be required from 1 to 10 years. At 10 years post hip and knee replacement, we recommend clinical, which may be virtual, and radiographic evaluation. After 10 years post hip and knee replacement, frequency of further follow-up should be based on the 10-year assessment; ongoing rapid access to orthopaedic review is still required. Overarching statements. These recommendations apply to post primary hip and knee replacement follow-up. The 10-year time point in these recommendations is based on a lack of robust evidence beyond ten years. The term complex cases refer to individual patient and surgical factors that may increase the risk for replacement failure

Introduction. Quality measures play a substantial role in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' hospital payment and public reporting programs. The purpose of this study was to assess whether public measurement of total hip and knee arthroplasty risk-standardized readmission (RSRRs) and complication rates (RSCRs) was temporally associated with decreasing rates of adverse outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries. Methods. We evaluated annual trends in hospital-level risk-standardized complication and readmission rates in the fiscal years 2010–11 and 2016–17 for patients undergoing hospital-based inpatient hip/knee replacement procedures. We calculated hospital-level rates using the same measures and methodology used in public reporting. We examined annual trends in the distribution of hospital-level outcomes through density plots (similar to histograms). Results. Both rates of and variation in the complication and readmission outcomes declined steadily between 2010–11 and 2016–17. We noted a 33% relative reduction in hospital-level risk-standardized complication rates (RSCRs) and 25% relative reduction in hospital-level risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRRs). The interquartile range of RSCRs decreased by 18% (relative reduction) and of RSRRs decreased by 34% (relative reduction). Risk variable frequency in complication and readmission models did not systematically change over time, suggesting no evidence of widespread bias or up-coding. Conclusion. This study demonstrates that hospital-level complication and readmission rates after hip/knee replacements and variation in hospital-level performance declined following the start of public reporting and financial incentives associated with measurement. The consistent decreasing trend in rates of and variation outcomes suggests steady improvements and greater consistency among hospitals in clinical outcomes for hip/knee replacement patients in the years 2016–17 compared to 2010–11. While improvements in surgical practices and care coordination may partially account for these findings, the precise influence of measure public reporting on clinical outcomes is difficult to ascertain. Interactions between public reporting, payment, and hospital coding practices are complex and require continued study

The aims were to assess whether preoperative joint-specific function (JSF) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were associated with level of clinical frailty in patients waiting for a primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) or knee arthroplasty (KA). Patients waiting for a THA (n=100) or KA (n=100) for more than six months were prospectively recruited from the study centre. Overall, 162 patients responded to the questionnaire (81 THA; 81 KA). Patient demographics, Oxford score, EuroQol five dimension (EQ-5D) score, EuroQol visual analogue score (EQ-VAS), Rockwood Clinical Frailty Score (CFS), and time spent on the waiting list were collected. There was a significant correlation between CFS and the Oxford score (THA r=ˆ’0.838; p<0.001, KA r=ˆ’0.867; p<0.001), EQ-5D index (THA r=ˆ’0.663, p<0.001; KA r=ˆ’0.681; p< 0.001), and EQ-VAS (THA r=ˆ’0.414; p<0.001, KA r=ˆ’0.386; p<0.001). Confounding variables (demographics and waiting time) where adjusted for using multiple regression analysis. For each 8.5 (THA, 95% CI 7.1 to 10.0; p<0.001) and 9.9 (KA, 95% CI 8.4 to 11.4; p<0.001) point change in the Oxford score, there was an associated change in level of the CFS. For each 0.16 (THA, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.22; p<0.001) and 0.20 (KA, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.27; p<0.001) utility change in EQ-5D, there was an associated change in level of the CFS. EQ-VAS (THA, B=ˆ’11.5; p<0.001, KA B=ˆ’7.9; p=0.005) was also associated with CFS. JSF and HRQoL in patients awaiting THA or KA for more than six months, were independently associated with level of clinical frailty. With further prospective studies, clinical frailty may prove to be a useful metric to assist in the prioritization of arthroplasty waiting lists

Patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) are commonly associated with high pain scores and narcotic use. Duloxetine is effective in relieving chronic pain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duloxetine for pain management following THA/TKA. Five major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared duloxetine to placebo in patients that underwent THA/TKA. The primary outcome was pain reduction with rest and movement at short-term and long-term time intervals. Secondary outcomes were the use of analgesics, length of stay, and safety profile. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Data were pooled using RevMan 5.4. The results were reported as mean difference (MD) or standardised MD (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Eight RCTs with 767 patients were included. 50.2% (n=385/767) of patients received duloxetine. After one day, duloxetine was superior to the control regarding pain reduction with rest (SMD= −0.22 [−0.41, −0.03], p=0.02) after sensitivity analysis and pain reduction at movement (SMD= −0.39 [−0.55, −0.24], p<0.001). Similarly, after 12 weeks, duloxetine significantly reduced pain with rest (SMD= −0.3 [−0.52, −0.09], p=0.006) and pain with movement (SMD= −0.52 [−0.87, −0.17], p=0.003). In addition, after sensitivity analysis, duloxetine was associated with less analgesic use after one day (MD= −4.65 [−7.3, −2.01], p<0.001) and two days (MD= −5.65 [−10.62, −0.67], p=0.03). Patients who received duloxetine also required fewer analgesics after three days. However, there was no significant difference between the duloxetine and control groups in analgesic use after one week, length of stay, and adverse events. Duloxetine was superior to the placebo regarding short-term and long-term pain reduction with rest and movement following THA/TKA. Duloxetine reduced postoperative analgesic use. There was no significant difference between duloxetine and placebo regarding adverse events and length of stay

Aims. The aim of this study was to conduct evidence synthesis on the available published literature of the impact of the training status of the operating surgeon (trainee vs. consultant) on the survival and revision rate of primary hip and knee replacements. Patients and Methods. We conducted a systematic review according to Cochrane guidelines. Separate searches were performed for hip and knee replacements, with meta-analysis and presentation of results in parallel. We searched MEDLINE and Embase databases from inception to 17 September 2019 and included controlled trials and cohort studies reporting implant survival estimates, or revision rates of hip and knee replacements according to the grade of the operating surgeon. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019150494). Results. 8 studies (5 hip papers and 3 knee papers) met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in the survival estimates for total hip replacements (THRs) performed by trainees compared to consultants at 5-years follow-up (97.9% vs 98.1%, p = 0.74). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the revision rate of THRs performed by trainees and consultants at both 5 and 10-year intervals of follow-up (relative risk [RR]: 5yrs = 0.88 (95% CI: 0.46, 1.70; P = 0.71); 10yrs = 0.68 (95% CI: 0.37, 1.26; P = 0.22)). There was no significant difference in the survival estimates at 10-years for total knee replacements (TKRs) performed by trainees compared to consultants (96.2% vs 95.1%, p=0.49). Conclusion. There is no evidence in the existing literature that trainee surgeons have worse outcomes than their consultant colleagues, in terms of the survival, or rate of revision of hip and knee replacements at 5–10 years follow-up. This may mean that there is genuinely no difference or that, in the context of contemporary training programmes, appropriate case-mix selection and supervision of trainees is currently employed

Aims. The practice of overlapping surgery has been increasing in the delivery of orthopaedic surgery, aiming to provide efficient, high-quality care. However, there are concerns about the safety of this practice. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of a model of partially overlapping surgery that we termed ‘swing room’ in the practice of primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was carried out on patients who underwent primary THA and TKA between 2006 and 2017 in two academic centres. Cases were stratified as partially overlapping (swing room), in which the surgeon is in one operating room (OR) while the next patient is being prepared in another, or nonoverlapping surgery. The demographic details of the patients which were collected included operating time, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications within six weeks of the procedure, unplanned hospital readmissions, and unplanned reoperations. Fisher's exact, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, chi-squared tests, and logistic regression analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results. A total of 12,225 cases performed at our institution were included in the study, of which 10,596 (86.6%) were partially overlapping (swing room) and 1,629 (13.3%) were nonoverlapping. There was no significant difference in the mean age, sex, body mass index (BMI), side, and LOS between the two groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in the swing room group (58.2 minutes) compared with the nonoverlapping group (62.8 minutes; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the rates of complications, readmission and reoperations (p = 0.801 and p = 0.300, respectively) after adjusting for baseline American Society of Anesthesiologists scores. Conclusion. The new ‘swing room’ model yields similar short-term outcomes without an increase in complication rates compared with routine single OR surgery in patients undergoing primary THA or TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):112–115

To examine whether Natural Language Processing (NLP) using a state-of-the-art clinically based Large Language Model (LLM) could predict patient selection for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA), across a range of routinely available clinical text sources. Data pre-processing and analyses were conducted according to the Ai to Revolutionise the patient Care pathway in Hip and Knee arthroplasty (ARCHERY) project protocol (. https://www.researchprotocols.org/2022/5/e37092/. ). Three types of deidentified Scottish regional clinical free text data were assessed: Referral letters, radiology reports and clinic letters. NLP algorithms were based on the GatorTron model, a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) based LLM trained on 82 billion words of de-identified clinical text. Three specific inference tasks were performed: assessment of the base GatorTron model, assessment after model-fine tuning, and external validation. There were 3911, 1621 and 1503 patient text documents included from the sources of referral letters, radiology reports and clinic letters respectively. All letter sources displayed significant class imbalance, with only 15.8%, 24.9%, and 5.9% of patients linked to the respective text source documentation having undergone surgery. Untrained model performance was poor, with F1 scores (harmonic mean of precision and recall) of 0.02, 0.38 and 0.09 respectively. This did however improve with model training, with mean scores (range) of 0.39 (0.31–0.47), 0.57 (0.48–0.63) and 0.32 (0.28–0.39) across the 5 folds of cross-validation. Performance deteriorated on external validation across all three groups but remained highest for the radiology report cohort. Even with further training on a large cohort of routinely collected free-text data a clinical LLM fails to adequately perform clinical inference in NLP tasks regarding identification of those selected to undergo THA. This likely relates to the complexity and heterogeneity of free-text information and the way that patients are determined to be surgical candidates

Introduction. The practice of overlapping surgery has been increasing in the delivery of orthopaedic care, aiming to provide efficient, high-quality care. However, there have been concerns about the safety of this practice. The purpose of this study is to examine safety and efficacy of a model of partially overlapping surgery that we termed “the swing room” in practice in primary hip and knee arthroplasty. Methods. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data using an administrative database was carried out on patients who underwent primary unilateral total hip and total knee arthroplasty from 2006 to 2017 at two sites of one academic center staffed by four arthroplasty surgeons. All revisions and bilateral primary procedures were excluded. Cases were stratified as overlapping or non-overlapping. Overlapping was defined when a surgeon had access to two operating rooms with two teams, and non-overlapping was defined as when a surgeon only had access to a single operating room on a particular day. Patient demographic characteristics, operating room time, procedure time, length of stay, Postoperative complications within 30 days of the procedure, unplanned hospital readmissions, unplanned reoperations, and emergency department visits were collected. The Fisher's exact Wilcoxon rank-sum test and logistic regression analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results. Of 12,225 cases were performed at our institution, 10600 cases (86.7%) were overlapping, and 1625 cases (13.3%) were non-overlapping. There was no difference in the mean age, sex, BMI, side and length of stay between patients who underwent overlapping surgery and those who underwent non- overlapping surgery. Operating room time was significantly shorter in the overlapping surgery group 58.2 min compared to the non-overlapping group 62.8 min p <0.001. There was no significant difference in complications (1.4% non-overlapping vs. 1.3% overlapping; p =0.801) and 30 days readmission (2.9% non-overlapping vs. 3.4% overlapping; p=0.300). Conclusion. The new “swing room” model yields similar short-term outcomes with no increase in complication rates compared to standard single room surgery in primary hip and knee arthroplasty practice. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. The purpose of the study was to determine access to and, ability to use telemedicine technology in an adult hip and knee reconstruction patient population and we seek to understand these patients' perceived benefits, risks and preferences of telemedicine. Methods. We performed a cross-sectional telephone administered survey on patients scheduled to undergo primary THA and TKA by one of six surgeons at a single academic institution between March 23 and June 2, 2020. Results. 163 patients were contacted and 113 (69.3%) completed the survey. Of the patients that completed surveys, 88% of patients reported using the internet with 94% reporting owning a device capable of videoconferencing. 78% of patients had participated in a video call in the past year and 37% having done a video visit with their physician. When asked for their preferred method for a physician visit, 80% ranked in-person as their first choice, followed by 18% preferring a video visit. Perceived benefits of telemedicine visits included reduced travel to appointments (87% agree or strongly agree) and reduced cost of attending appointments (63% agree or strongly agree). However, patients were concerned that they would not establish the same patient-physician connection (51% agree or strongly agree) and would not receive the same level of care (33% agree or strongly agree) through telemedicine visits versus in person visits. Conclusion. The majority of total hip and knee arthroplasty patients have access to and are capable of using the technology required for telemedicine visits. However, patients still prefer to have in person visit over concern that they will not establish the same patient-physician connection and will not receive the same level of care, despite benefits of reduced time spent traveling to and cost of attending appointments, and making it easier to attend appointments

Infection following total hip or knee arthroplasty is a serious complication. We noted an increase in post-operative infection in cases carried out in a temporary operating theatre. We therefore compared those cases performed in standard and temporary operating theatres and examined the deep periprosthetic infection rates. A total of 1233 primary hip and knee arthroplasties were performed between August 2012 and June 2013. 44% were performed in temporary theatres. The two groups were matched for age, sex, BMI and ASA grade. The deep infection rate for standard operating theatres was 0/684 (0%); for temporary theatres it was 8/539 (1.5%); p=0.001. Use of a temporary operating theatre for primary hip and knee arthroplasty was associated with an unacceptable increase in deep infection. We do not advocate the use of these theatres for primary joint arthroplasty

This conversation represents an attempt by several arthroplasty surgeons to critique several abstracts presented over the last year as well as to use them as a jumping off point for trying to figure out where they fit in into our current understanding of multiple issues in modern hip and knee arthroplasty

Extensive and severe bone loss of the femur may be a result of a failed total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with multiple revision surgeries which may be caused by factors such as infection, periprosthetic fracture or osteolysis. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes of using the “Push-Through Total Femoral Prosthesis” (PTTF) for revision of a total hip replacement with extreme bone loss.

Fourteen patients who had extensive bone defects of the femur due to failed THR's and were treated with PTTF between 2012 and 2020 were included in this study. Primary functional outcomes were assessed using Harris Hip Score (HHS), Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scores. Range of motion, complications, and ambulatory status were also recorded to assess secondary outcomes.

Two of 14 patients underwent surgery with PTTF for both knee and hip arthroplasty revision. The mean time between index surgery and PTTF was 15 years (3 to 32 yrs.). Acetabular components were revised in six of 14 patients. After a mean follow-up of 5.9 years, hip dislocations occurred in 3 patients. All dislocated hips were in patients with retained non-constrained acetabular bearings. Patient satisfaction was high (MSTS: 67%, HHS: 61.2%, TESS 64.6%) despite a high re-operation rate and minor postoperative problems.

PTTF is a unique alternative that may be considered for a failed THA revision procedure in patients with an extreme femoral bone defect. Patients are able to ambulate pain free relatively well. Routine usage of constrained liners should be considered to avoid hip dislocation which was our main problem following the procedure.

Introduction. Due to the opioid epidemic, our service developed a cultural change highlighted by decreasing discharge opioids after lower extremity arthroplasty. However, concern of potentially increasing refill requests exists. As such, the goal of this study was to analyze whether decreased discharge opioids led to increased postoperative opioid refills. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 19,428 patients undergoing a primary hip or knee arthroplasty at a single institution from 2016–2019. Patients that underwent secondary procedures within that timeframe were excluded. Two-thousand two-hundred and forty-one patients (12%) were on narcotics preoperatively or had chronic pain syndrome. Two reductions in routine discharge narcotics were performed over this timeframe. First, 8,898 patients routinely received 750 morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). After the first reduction, 4,842 patients routinely received 520 MMEs. After a second reduction, 5,688 patients routinely received 320 MMEs. We analyzed refill rates, refill MMEs, and whether discharge MMEs were associated with refill MMEs in a multivariate model. Results. Opioid refill rates were 28%, 32%, and 33% in each timeframe (p=0.001). Significantly fewer patients received narcotic refills after 6 weeks in the 320 MME group (8%) compared to the 750 MME group (6%, p=0.02). Total refill MMEs reduced significantly from a mean of 282 in the first to 227 in the last timeframe (p<0.001). After controlling for age, sex, BMI, history of anxiety/depression, and procedure type, opioid discharge of <400 MMEs was not a risk factor for increased refill MMEs in opioid-naïve patients (p=0.23). Conclusion. While decrease in MMEs prescribed at discharge after arthroplasty led to a slight increase in the number of opioid refills (5%), there was a reduction in total refill MMEs. Furthermore, less patients received refills beyond 6 weeks postoperatively. This institutional cultural change led to a reduction in opioid prescriptions after primary arthroplasty equivalent to 500,000 oxycodone 5 mg tablets

Given the prolonged waits for hip arthroplasty seen across the U.K. it is important that we optimise priority systems to account for potential disparities in patient circumstances and impact. We set out to achieve this through a two-stage approach. This included a Delphi-study of patient and surgeon preferences to determine what should be considered when determining patient priority, followed by a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to decide relative weighting of included attributes.

The study was conducted according to the published protocol ([https://boneandjoint.org.uk/article/10.1302/2633-1462.310.BJO-2022-0071](https://boneandjoint.org.uk/article/10.1302/2633-1462.310.BJO-2022-0071)). The Delphi study was performed online over 3 rounds with anonymous ranking and feedback. Included factors were voted as either Consensus in, Consensus out, or No Consensus• following an established scoring criterion. A final consensus meeting determined the prioritisation factors (and their levels) to be included in the DCE. The DCE was then conducted using an online platform, with surgeons performing 18 choice sets regarding which merited greater priority between two hypothetical patients. Results were collated and analysed using multinomial logit regression analysis (MNL).

For the Delphi study there were 43 responses in the first round, with a subsequent 91% participation rate. Final consensus inclusion was achieved for Pain; Mobility/Function; Activities of Daily Living; Inability to Work/Care; Length of Time Waited; Radiological Severity and Mental Wellbeing. 70 individuals subsequently contributed to the DCE, with radiological severity being the most significant factor (Coefficient 2.27 \[SD 0.31\], p<0.001), followed by pain (Coefficient 1.08 \[SD 0.13\], p<0.001) and time waited (Coefficient for 1-month additional wait 0.12 \[SD 0.02\], p<0.001). The calculated trade-off in waiting time for a 1-level change in pain (e.g., moderate to severe pain) was 9.14 months.

These results present a new method of determining comparative priority for those on primary hip arthroplasty waiting lists. Evaluation of potential implementation in clinical practice is now required.

Introduction. Hip and knee replacements are predictable orthopaedic procedure with excellent clinical outcomes. Discharging or leaking wounds affect length of hospital stay, affect bed planning and predispose to superficial and potentially deep wound infection. Predictable wound healing therefore remains the first hurdle. This trial aims to study the effectiveness of portable disposable incisional negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) dressings in hip and knee replacements. This trial aims to study the effectiveness of portable disposable incisional negative pressure wound dressings in hip and knee replacements and the impact on wound healing, length of stay and wound complications. Patients/Materials & Methods. Following ethical approval 110 patients each were randomised to ‘Control group’ and ‘Study group’. Patients in control group received traditional dressings and those in study group received an incisional NPWT (PICO) manufactured by Smith & Nephew. Post operatively, state of the wound, level of wound exudate, length of hospital stay and complications were documented. Results. The average length of stay for control group was 4.72 ± 0.69 (Mean ± SEM) and for the study group 3.79±0.19 (mean ± SEM. Eight percent of the control group patients had wound related complications as opposed to 2% complications in the study group. The mechanical and device related issues in the study group accounted to 10%. Discussion. There is little evidence as to whether wound dressing choices affect wound healing in incisional wounds. There is good evidence for negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in complex, open and chronic wounds; however the concept of application of NPWT to routine incisional wounds is novel. Advances such as disposable and portable negative devices have made this option attractive in elective surgery. Conclusion. Our study shows that its application in routine primary hip and knee replacement can improve wound healing, facilitate early and predictable discharge from the hospital and reduce post discharge complications. This is particularly true for high risk wounds such as patients with BMI of >35 and is cost effective

Tranexamic Acid (TXA) is now commonly used in major surgical operations including orthopaedics. The TRAC-24 randomised control trial aimed to assess if an additional 24 hours of TXA post – operatively in primary total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) reduced blood loss. Contrary to other orthopaedic studies to date this trial included high risk patients. This paper presents the results of a cost analysis undertaken alongside this RTC.

TRAC-24 was a prospective randomised controlled trial on patients undergoing TKA and THA. Three groups were included, Group 1 received 1 g intravenous (IV) TXA perioperatively and an additional 24-hour post-operative oral regime, group 2 received only the perioperative dose and group 3 did not receive TXA. Cost analysis was performed out to day 90.

Group 1 was associated with the lowest mean total costs, followed by group 2 and then group 3. The difference between groups 1 and 3 −£797.77 (95% CI −1478.22, −117.32) were statistically significant. Extended oral dosing reduced costs for patients undergoing THA but not TKA. The reduced costs in groups 1 and 2 resulted from reduced length of stay, readmission rates, Accident and Emergency (A&E) attendances and blood transfusions.

This study demonstrated significant cost savings when using TXA in primary THA or TKA. Extended oral dosing reduced costs further in THA but not TKA.

Introduction

Elective surgery elicits a systemic immune response and may result in immunosuppression in certain patients. It is currently unknown whether patients are at an increased risk for viral infection and associated illness in the immediate postoperative period following total joint arthroplasty. This question has become more important given the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Introduction

Bundle payment models have clinical and economic impacts on providers. Despite efforts made to improve care, experience has shown that a few episodes with costs well above a target (bundle busters) can reduce or negate positive performances. The purpose of this study was to identify both the primary episode drivers of cost and patient factors that led to episodes above target.

Introduction

The Best Practice Tariff (BpT) for primary THR / TKR was established in 2014 and rewards good clinical practice with a £550 uplift on the £5000 basic reimbursement. For an ‘average unit’ performing 220 primary THR and 260 eligible knee surgeries (NJR data) this equates to £265,000 per year or over £1million since its inception. The aim of this study was to investigate why Chelsea & Westminster Hospital NHS Trust was not receiving this reimbursement.