At the end of 2018, the NZ Joint Registry introduced a “Surgeon Outlier” policy, whereby each year, if an individual surgeons’ lower 95% confidence interval of their revision rate, measured in revision/100 component years(r/ocys), was above the NZ mean (0.71 r/ocys), that surgeon was required to audit their results with a nominated peer. This study investigates whether outlier surgeons also have high early (1 month and 1 year) revision rates. In 2018, 236 surgeons performed 9,186 total hip arthroplasties in NZ. At the end of 2018, 11 surgeons received notification they were outliers. Results from all surgeons for years 2016, 2017 and 2018 were combined to form the first (pre-notification) time interval, and results from years 2019, 2020 and 2021 were combined to form the second time interval (post-notification). Outlier surgeons performed 2001 total hip replacements in the first time interval and 1947 hips in the second. Early revision rates (1 month and 1 year) of both outlier and nonoutlier surgeons for both time intervals were analysed. Non-outlier surgeons had a consistent mean early revision rate of 0.75% at one month and 1.6% at one year for both time intervals. The 11 outlier surgeons had a higher earlier revision rate of 1.35% at one month and 2.45% at one year for the pre-notification time interval. These values reduced for the post-notification time interval to a revision rate of 1.23% for one month and 2.36% for one year. Poor joint registry results of individual surgeons are often attributed to a poor choice of prosthesis. This study shows early revision rates of outlier surgeons, where prosthesis selection has minimal influence, are also high. A slight improvement in early revision rates of outlier surgeons since introduction of the policy shows it is working

Aims. “Get It Right First Time” (GIRFT) and NHS England’s Best Practice Tariff (BPT) have published directives advising that patients over the ages of 65 (GIRFT) and 69 years (BPT) receiving total hip arthroplasty (THA) should receive cemented implants and have brought in financial penalties if this policy is not observed. Despite this, worldwide, uncemented component use has increased, a situation described as a ‘paradox’. GIRFT and BPT do, however, acknowledge more data are required to support this edict with current policies based on the National Joint Registry survivorship and implant costs. Methods. This study compares THA outcomes for over 1,000 uncemented Corail/Pinnacle constructs used in all age groups/patient frailty, under one surgeon, with identical pre- and postoperative pathways over a nine-year period with mean follow-up of five years and two months (range: nine months to nine years and nine months). Implant information, survivorship, and regular postoperative Oxford Hip Scores (OHS) were collected and two comparisons undertaken: a comparison of those aged over 65 years with those 65 and under and a second comparison of those aged 70 years and over with those aged under 70. Results. Overall revision rate was 1.3% (13/1,004). A greater number of revisions were undertaken in those aged over 65 years, but numbers were small and did not reach significance. The majority of revisions were implant-independent. Single component analysis revealed a 99.9% and 99.6% survival for the uncemented cup and femoral component, respectively. Mean patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) improvement for all ages outperformed the national PROMs and a significantly greater proportion of those aged over 65/69 years reached and maintained a meaningful improvement in their OHS earlier than their younger counterparts (p < 0.05/0.01 respectively). Conclusion. This study confirms that this uncemented THA system can be used safely and effectively in patient groups aged over 65 years and those over 69 years, with low complication and revision rates. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(5):293–300

Industries such as agriculture, construction and military have stringent rules about hearing protection due to the risk of noise induced hearing loss (NIHL). Due to the use of power tools, orthopaedic staff may be at risk of the same condition. The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have clear standards as to what is deemed acceptable occupational noise levels on an A-weighted and C weighted scale. This review is aimed to assess evidence on noise exposure testing within Orthopaedic theatres to see if it exceeds the HSE regulations. A targeted search of online databases PUBMED and EMBASE was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) principles. This review was registered prospectively in PROSPERO. An eligibility criterion identifying clinical studies which assessed noise exposure for Orthopaedic staff in theatres were included. Noise exposure data was extracted from these studies and a comparison was made with A weighted and C weighted acceptable exposure levels as quoted in the HSE regulations. Fourteen papers were deemed eligible, which reviewed 133 Orthopaedic operations and 64 Orthopaedic instruments. In total, 61% (81 of 132) of Orthopaedic operations and 70% (45 of 64) of instruments exceeded the noise regulations on an A weighted scale. 22% (10 of 46) of operations exceeded the maximum C weighted peak acceptable noise level. Orthopaedic instruments and operations can exceed safe occupational noise levels. NHS Trusts have clear policies about noise exposure in the workplace but have yet to identify Orthopaedic theatres as a potential at risk area. Orthopaedic staff need education, monitoring and protection whereas Employers and Occupational Health should consider assessments to identify at risk staff in Orthopaedic theatres and offer preventative methods from NIHL

The aims were to assess whether vitamin D deficiency influenced mortality risk for patients presenting with a hip fracture. A retrospective study was undertaken including all patients aged over 50 years that were admitted with a hip fracture to a single centre during a 24-month period. Serum vitamin D levels were assessed. Patient demographics and perioperative variables and mortality were collected. Cox regression analysis (adjusting for confounding) was utilised to determine the independent association between serum vitamin D level and patient mortality. The cohort consisted of 2075 patients with a mean age of 80.7 years and 1471 (70.9%) were female. 1510 (72.8%) patients had a serum vitamin D level taken, of which 876 (58.0%) were deficient (50nmol/l). The median follow up was 417 (IQR 242 to 651) days. During follow up there were 464 (30.7%) deaths. Survival at 1 year was significantly (p=0.003) lower for patients who were vitamin D deficient (71.7%, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 68.6 to 74.9) compared to those who were not (79.0%, 95% CI 75.9 to 82.3). Vitamin D deficiency was also independently associated with an increased mortality risk at 2-years (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.53, p=0.025), but not at 1-year (p=0.057). Hip fracture patients with vitamin D deficiency had an increased mortality risk. This risk was independent of confounders at 2 years. The role of measuring vitamin D levels in these patients is unclear. Improved public health policy about vitamin D may be required to reduce deficiency in this patient population

Aims. Thromboprophylaxis following Total Hip Replacement (THR) surgery remains controversial, balancing VTE prevention against wound leakage and subsequent deep infection. We analysed the 90 day cause of death post THR in our institution after the implementation of new thromboprophylactic policy of low dose aspirin for low risk patients, as part of a multimodal regime. Those at high risk were anticoagulated. Patients and methods. The PAS database was used to identify patients undergoing primary THR between January 2012 and June 2017 at The Royal Derby Hospital, and all deaths within 90 days. Trauma cases were excluded. Case note review and Coroner's verdict were utilised to ascertain cause of death. Results were compared to a previous study at the same institution prior to the introduction of the new policy, where thromboprophylaxis was decided upon by surgeon preference for either LMWH, aspirin or warfarin. Results. During this period 4021 THRs were performed. The rate of mortality was 0.22% at 90 days. This compares to 0.58% in the previous study with the only other factor changing being the rapidity of post op mobilization. Of the 9 deaths, only one was due to fatal pulmonary embolism. None of the deaths were at high risk of VTE. This compared to 5 fatal pulmonary embolism deaths in1838 patients in the previous study in the LMWH group. The leading causes of death were heart failure and lower respiratory tract infection. Conclusion. Our institution reports a similar 90 day (0.22%) mortality using aspirin to that in the last 5 years on the NJR (0.3%) in which over 80% use LMWH. We confirm that fatal PE following elective THR with a multi-modal prophylaxis regime is rare. Changing to low dose aspirin in low risk patients is a safe option

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. The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) initiative was implemented to address the two most commonly billed inpatient surgical procedures, total hip and knee arthroplasty. The primary purpose of this manuscript is to review the economic implications of one institution's mandatory involvement in CJR in comparison to prior involvement in Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI). Methods. The average cost per episode of care (EOC) was calculated using our institution's historical data. The target prices, projected savings or losses per EOC, and the projected annual savings for both BPCI and CJR were established and comparatively analyzed. Results. The CJR target prices will decrease in comparison to BPCI target prices by: 24% for MS-DRG 469 without fracture, 22.8% for 469 with fracture, 26.1% for 470 without fracture, 27.7% for 470 with fracture; resulting in a reduction in savings per EOC by: 92.8% for MS-DRG 469 without fracture, 166.0% for 469 with fracture, 94.9% for 470 without fracture, 61.7% for 470 with fracture (Table 1). This institution's projected annual savings under CJR will decrease by 83.3%. Conclusion. These results suggest that the margin for savings in CJR will be substantially reduced compared to those in BPCI. Hospitals resources previously devoted will have far less impact in CJR and hospitals new to CJR who have not made these investments previously, will require even greater resources for developing cost-reduction and quality control strategies to remain financially solvent. The statements contained in this document are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of CMS. The authors assume responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the information contained in this document. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Aims

Periprosthetic hip-joint infection is a multifaceted and highly detrimental outcome for patients and clinicians. The incidence of prosthetic joint infection reported within two years of primary hip arthroplasty ranges from 0.8% to 2.1%. Costs of treatment are over five-times greater in people with periprosthetic hip joint infection than in those with no infection. Currently, there are no national evidence-based guidelines for treatment and management of this condition to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. The aim of this study is to develop guidelines based on evidence from the six-year INFection and ORthopaedic Management (INFORM) research programme.

The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently published guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection. The WHO guidelines, if implemented worldwide, could have an immense impact on our practices and those of the CDC have implications for healthcare policy in the United States. Our aim was to review the strategies for prevention of periprosthetic joint infection in light of these and other recent guidelines. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):3–10

Aims

The duration of systemic antibiotic treatment following first-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is contentious. Our philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, and to use a high local concentration of targeted antibiotics in cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. The aim of this study was to assess the success of this philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol.

Aims

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a common procedure to address pain and enhance function in hip disorders such as osteoarthritis. Despite its success, postoperative patient recovery exhibits considerable heterogeneity. This study aimed to investigate whether patients follow distinct pain trajectories following THA and identify the patient characteristics linked to suboptimal trajectories.

The purpose of this study is to compare 90-day costs and outcomes for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients between a non-obese (BMI 18.5–24.9) versus overweight (25–29.9), obese (30–34.9), severely-obese (35–39.9), morbidly-obese (40–44.9), and super-obese (45+) cohorts. We conducted a retrospective review of a prospective institutional database of primary THA patients from 2006–2013, including patients with a minimum of three-year follow-up. Thirty-three super-obese patients were identified, and the other five cohorts were randomly selected in a 2:1 ratio (total n = 363). Demographics, 90-day outcomes (costs, reoperations, and readmissions), and outcomes after three years (revisions and change scores for SF12, HHS, and WOMAC) were collected. Costs were determined using unit costs from our institutional administrative data for all in-hospital resource utilization. Comparisons between the non-obese and other groups were made with Kruskal-Wallis tests for non-normal data and chi-square and Fisher's exact test for categorical data. The 90-day costs in the morbidly-obese ($13,134 ± 7,250 mean ± standard deviation, p <0.01) and super-obese ($15,604 ± 6,783, p <0.01) cohorts were statistically significantly greater than the non-obese cohorts ($10,315 ± 1,848). Only the super-obese cohort had statistically greater 90-day reoperation and readmission rates than the non-obese cohort (18.2% vs 0%, p <0.01 and 21.2% vs 4.5%, p=0.02, respectively). In addition, reoperations and septic revisions after 3 years were greater in the super-obese cohort compared to the non-obese cohort 21.2% vs 3.0% (p = 0.01), and 18.2% vs 1.5% (p= 0.01), respectively. There were no other statistical differences between the other cohorts with the non-obese cohort at 90-days or after 3 years. Improvements in SF12, HHS, and WOMAC were comparable in all cohorts. The 90-day costs of a primary total hip arthroplasty for morbidly-obese (BMI 40–44.9) and super-obese (BMI>45) are significantly greater than for non-obese patients, yet these patients have comparable improvements in outcome scores. Health care policies, when based purely on the economic impact of health care delivery, may place morbidly-obese and super-obese patients at risk of losing arthroplasty care, thereby denying them access to the comparable quality of life improvements

Following a total hip arthroplasty (THA), early hospital readmission rates of 3–8% are considered as ‘acceptable’ in terms of medical care cost policies. Surprisingly, the impact of readmissions on mortality has not been priorly portrayed. Therefore, we aimed to analyse the mortality of unplanned readmissions after primary THA at a high-volume Argentinian center. We prospectively analysed 90-day readmissions of 815 unilateral, elective THA patients operated between 2010–2014 whose medical insurance was the one offered by our institution. Mean follow-up was 51 months (range, 37–84). Median age was 69 (IQR, 62–77). We stratified our sample into readmitted and non-readmitted cohorts. Through a Cox proportional hazard model, we compared demographic characteristics, clinical comorbidities, surgical outcomes and laboratory values between both groups in order to determine association with mortality. We found 37 (4.53%) readmissions at a median time of 40.44 days (IQR: 17.46–60.69). Factors associated with readmission were: hospital stay (p=0.00); surgical time (p=0.01); chronic renal insufficiency (p=0.03); ASA class 4 (p=0.00); morbid obesity (p=0.006); diabetes (p=0.04) and a high Charlson Index (p=0.00). Overall mortality rate of the series was 3.31% (27/815). Median time to mortality was 455.5 days (IQR: 297.58–1170.65). One-third (11/37) of the readmitted patients died, being sepsis non-related to the THA the most common cause of death. After adjusting for confounders, 90-day readmissions remained associated with mortality with an adjusted HR of 3.14 (CI95%: 1.05–9.36, p=0.04). Unplanned readmissions were an independent risk factor for future mortality, increasing 3 times the risk of a decease eventuality

Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman described Moral Hazard as “…any situation in which one person makes the decision about how much risk to take, while someone else bears the cost if things go badly”. The fidelity of some surgeons to their patients has been brought into question by recent press reports exposing a practice whereby one attending surgeon will be responsible for two patients undergoing surgery simultaneously. This is variously referred to as Overlapping Surgery, Concurrent Surgery, Simultaneous Surgery, Double-Booked Surgery or Ghost Surgery. This practice entails surgeons in training (residents and fellows) performing varying degrees of the patient's surgery while the attending surgeon is operating elsewhere. In general, the patient is not informed of this substitution. When informed, most would not allow it. Defenders of this practice site surgeon and hospital “efficiency”, independent operating experience by trainees, mass casualty triage and access to “in-demand” specialists. Critics feel it “is a breach of ethical behavior”, that “The most likely motive for this is profit for both the surgeon and hospital” and “Overlapping surgery… threatens our obligation as orthopaedic surgeons to respect the primacy of patient welfare…”. The American College of Surgeons, in response to public disclosures, created a policy on Overlapping Surgery. Its executive director wrote, “It is essential that the patient be informed of this practice and given enough notice so they may decide whether to seek care from another surgeon or at another institution*. The US Senate Finance Committee investigated Overlapping/Concurrent Surgery practices. It expressed concerns over − 1) lack of informed consent, 2) plausible risks to patient safety, 3) use of Medicare billing regulations to determine acceptable surgical practices and 4) surgeons self- defining the “critical part” of the operation. Studies to date do not resolve the propriety of this practice. All but one is short term. Most show longer surgical durations. Most show no increase in 30-day complication rates. The only long- term study found a 90% increase in complication rate in hip procedures at one year when surgery overlapped. None document the location of the surgeon during the procedure or report efficacy. Over 7 million living Americans are beneficiaries of either a total hip or total knee replacement. These patients are made whole, their suffering relieved, their function and lives restored. These miracles of modern medicine are not without cost. The United States spends $3.5 trillion dollars annually on health care, almost 20% of our GDP. Delivering health care is a grave responsibility and any person involved in it must understand the importance and consequences of their actions. The third leading cause of American deaths is medical errors. A recent study estimated that 4 out of 100 patients entering the hospital for surgery will die within seven days. Recognizing this, a surgeon's role as a patient's moral fiduciary, concerned primarily with protecting the interests of the patient, must be honored as a sacred trust. The financial pressure on the surgeon from stagnant surgical fees is the elephant in the room that must be addressed in relation to this matter. When fees are cut, surgeons operate more. Plato, in The Republic, recounts an allegory about a magic ring that makes its wearer invisible. He asks the question; Will the power of anonymity eliminate morality and ethics? When we as surgeons become “invisible” to our anesthetized patients during surgery, how will we answer that question?

Outcomes for patients with acute illnesses may be affected by the day of the week they present to hospital. Policy makers state this ‘weekend effect’ to be the main reason for pursuing a change in consultant weekend working patterns. However, it is uncertain whether such a phenomenon exists for elective orthopaedic surgery. This study investigated whether a ‘weekend effect’ contributed to adverse outcomes in patients undergoing elective hip and knee replacements. Retrospectively collected data was obtained from our institutions electronic patient records. Using univariate analysis, we examined potential risk factors including; Age, Sex, ASA Grade, Comorbidities, as well as the day of the week, hospital admission and surgery occurred. Subsequent multivariate analyses identified covariate- adjusted risk factors, associated with prolonged hospital stays. 30-day mortality data was assessed according to the day of the week surgery was performed. 892 patients underwent arthroplasty surgery from 01/09/2014 till the 31/08/2015. 457 patients had a total hip and 435 had a total knee replacement. 814 patients (91.3%) underwent surgery during the week, while 78 (8.7%) had surgery on a Saturday. There was no difference in the average Length of Stay (LOS) between groups (5.0, 2.6 versus 5.0, 3.4, p=0.95), and weekend surgery was not associated with a LOS greater than 4 days. The two variables found to be associated with a prolonged LOS were; increasing age (RR) 1.02 (95% CI: 1.01–1.03, p<0.001) and an ASA score of 2, (RR) 1.6 (95% CI: 1.15 − 2.20, p=0.005). There was one death in a patient who was ASA III, and who underwent surgery on a Monday. There is no ‘weekend effect’ for elective orthopaedic surgery. Changes in consultant weekend working patterns are unlikely to have any effect on mortality or LOS for elective orthopaedic patients

The statements contained in this document are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of CMS. The authors assume responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the information contained in this document. Background. The Bundled Payments for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative was introduced to reduce healthcare costs while maintaining quality. We examined data from a healthcare system comprised of five hospitals that elected to participate in the BPCI Major Joint Replacement of the Lower Extremity Model 2 initiative beginning July 1, 2015. We compared one hospital that did 439 BPCI hip cases to the four other hospitals that did 459 cases. Stratifying the data by hospital volume, we sought to determine if costs decreased during the BPCI period, how the savings were achieved, and if savings resulted in financial rewards for participation. Methods. The Medicare data included the target cost for each episode (based on historical data from 2009–2012 for each hospital that was adjusted quarterly) and actual Part A and Part B spending for 90 days. Using 1,574 primary hip replacements, we analyzed the costs associated with the anchor hospitalization, inpatient rehabilitation, skilled nursing facilities, home health, outpatient physical therapy and readmission to compare the 898 hips done during the 16-month BPCI initiative period with the 676 hips done during the 1-year period preceding BPCI participation. Owing to the nonparametric distribution of the cost data, a Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the higher volume hospital with the four lower volume hospitals. Results. Compared to the preceding year, the mean episode of care cost during BPCI participation decreased by 14.1% (from $21,823 to $18,755, p=0.02) at the higher volume hospital and by 13.1% (from $32,138 to $27,940, p=0.02) at the lower volume hospitals. During the BPCI period, the mean Medicare target cost was $18,490 at the higher volume hospital and $25,021 at the lower volume hospitals (p<0.001). At the higher volume hospital, the major components of the savings included $526,028 from reduced readmission rates (11.5% versus 3.0%, p<0.001), $393,757 primarily due to reduced length of stay at skilled nursing facilities (mean 33 days versus 26 days, p=0.07), and $205,459 associated with a decreased percentage of patients using inpatient rehabilitation (6.6% versus 3.2%, p=0.03). At the lower volume hospitals, the major components of the savings included $1,002,447 associated with a reduction in the length of stay at skilled nursing facilities (mean 37 days versus 27 days, p<0.001), $487,356 associated with a decrease in the percentage of patients using inpatient rehab (11.6% versus 6.5%, p=0.01), and $355,695 associated with reduced readmission costs. Despite the savings, the mean reconciliation penalty was $184 per case at the higher volume hospital and $2,309 per case at the lower volume hospitals. Stratified by the type of hip replacement, reconciliation for elective primaries resulted in a mean reward of $848 per case for the 409 hips performed at the higher volume hospital and $2,497 per case for the 266 hips done at the lower volume hospitals. For hip fracture cases, reconciliation resulted in a mean penalty of $14,248 per case among the 30 hips done at the higher volume hospital and $8,932 per case for the 193 hips done at the lower volume hospitals. Conclusions. Based on the reduction in costs and decreased readmission rates, the BPCI initiative is achieving its objectives. Although the higher and lower volume hospitals achieved savings during BPCI participation, the target costs were lower than the actual costs resulting in a reconciliation penalty that was driven by the cost of hip fractures. The reconciliation rewards associated with elective primary THAs compared to the substantial penalties associated with hip fractures support the premise that these groups should have different targets costs

Aims

The aim of this study was to examine whether socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with a higher risk of infections following total hip arthroplasty (THA) at 30 and 90 days.

Aims

This study investigates the use of the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) score in a young hip arthroplasty population, and its ability to capture additional benefit beyond the ceiling effect of conventional patient-reported outcome measures.

We studied survival to 38 years after Charnley low-friction arthroplasty of the hip. We used revision as an end-point, while adopting a policy of regular follow-up and early revision for radiological changes alone if indicated. Between November 1962 and June 2005, 22 066 primary low-friction arthroplasties (17 409 patients) had been performed at Wrightington Hospital by more than 330 surgeons. By June 2006, 1001 (4.5%) hips had been revised and 1490 patients (2662 hips, 12%) had died. At 31 years, where a minimum of 40 hips were still attending follow-up, survival with revision for infection as an endpoint was 95%, for dislocation 98%, for a fractured stem 88.6%, for a loose stem 72.5% and for a loose acetabular component 53.7%. Wear and loosening of the ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene acetabular component were the main long-term problems. We conclude that regular follow-up after hip replacement is essential and that all operative findings should be recorded at revision

Introduction. Patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB) have a significantly increased risk of both superficial wound infection and deep infection following arthroplasty. Debate continues as to whether treatment of pre-operative ASB reduces the risk of subsequent prosthetic joint infection. Patients/Materials & Methods. All arthroplasty units in Scotland were contacted by telephone and asked a standard series of questions regarding pre-operative urine testing in arthroplasty patients. A review of the literature was also performed. Results. All arthroplasty units in Scotland test all patients’ urine pre-operatively. 55% of clinics dipstick urine and send a midstream urine (MSU) sample if dipstick positive. 45% send an MSU without urine dipstick testing. All treat a positive MSU with oral antibiotics via the patient's GP practice. Discussion. Historically all arthroplasty patients have had urine testing as part of their routine pre-operative assessment, and this remains current British Hip Society guidance. Globally, antibiotic use is under increasing scrutiny. The evidence for treating pre-operative ASB with antibiotics appears to be lacking but this study suggests the majority of arthroplasty units continue to test for and treat ASB. Locally, this practice has been increasingly questioned by microbiologists and general practitioners. Irrespective of antibiotic treatment, we believe identifying patients with pre-operative ASB remains useful as ASB appears to represent a surrogate marker for immunocompromise. This allows patients to be warned of the increased infection risk and these patients may require altered peri-operative prophylactic antibiotic cover depending on local policy. Conclusion. Evidence for pre-operative antibiotic treatment of ASB is lacking but the majority of arthroplasty units continue this practice. Identification of pre-operative ASB is useful to identify increased infection risk and need for potential altered prophylactic antibiotic cover. We recommend formation of a consensus among arthroplasty surgeons to guide practice