INTRODUCTION. Quality monitoring is increasingly important to support and assure sustainability of the Orthopaedic practice. Many surgeons in a non-academic setting lack the resources to accurately monitor quality of care. Widespread use of electronic medical records (EMR) provides easier access to medical information and facilitates its analysis. However, manual review of EMRs is inefficient and costly. Artificial Intelligence (AI) software has allowed for development of automated search algorithms for extracting relevant complications from EMRs. We questioned whether an AI supported algorithm could be used to provide accurate feedback on the quality of care following Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) in a high-volume, non-academic setting. METHODS. 532 Consecutive patients underwent 613 THA between January 1. st. and December 31. st. , 2017. Patients were prospectively followed pre-op, 6 weeks, 3 months and 1 year. They were seen by the surgeon who created clinical notes and reported every adverse event. A random derivation cohort (100 patients, 115 hips) was used to determine accuracy. The algorithm was compared to manual extraction to validate performance in raw data extraction. The full cohort (532 patients, 613 hips) was used to determine its recall, precision and F-value. RESULTS. The algorithm had an accuracy value of 95.0%, compared to 94.5% for manual review (p=0.69). Recall of 96.0% was achieved with precision of 88.0% and F-measure of 0.85 for all adverse events. Recovery of 80.6% of patients was completely uneventful.
We performed a case–control study to compare
the rates of further surgery, revision and complications, operating time
and survival in patients who were treated with either an uncemented
hydroxyapatite-coated Corail bipolar femoral stem or a cemented
Exeter stem for a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. The
mean age of the patients in the uncemented group was 82.5 years
(53 to 97) and in the cemented group was 82.7 years (51 to 99) We used
propensity score matching, adjusting for age, gender and the presence
or absence of dementia and comorbidities, to produce a matched cohort
receiving an Exeter stem (n = 69) with which to compare the outcome of
patients receiving a Corail stem (n = 69). The Corail had a significantly
lower all-cause rate of further surgery (p = 0.016; odds ratio (OR)
0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.84) and number of hips undergoing major further
surgery (p = 0.029; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.09). The mean operating
time was significantly less for the Corail group than for the cemented Exeter
group (59 min [12 to 136] Cite this article: