There is little known about how patient socioeconomic status impacts clinical outcomes in hip preservation surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between indices of multiple deprivation, funding provider (NHS Funded or Private Funded) and clinical outcomes following surgery for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). The study analysed the data of 5590 patients recorded in the NAHR who underwent primary hip arthroscopic treatment for FAI between November 2013 and July 2023. Records were matched to the UK National index of multiple deprivation using the lower layer super output area. Using iHOT12 score, patient reported outcome measures were analysed at base line and 1 year following surgery. 2358 records were matched to LLSOA deciles. Between the lowest (most deprived) 3 deciles and the highest (least deprived) the average baseline iHOT12 score was 28.98 (n=366) and 35.33 (n=821). The proportion of patients receiving treatment through NHS funding compared to independent funding for the most deprived, 292 (90%) 37 (10%) respectively compared to the least deprived 515 (70%) and 244 (30%) respectively. At 1year, iHOT12 scores for each group were 51.64 (29.1 SD) compared to 61.5 (28.06 SD) respectively. The study demonstrates that patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds had poorer baseline and one-year post-surgery iHOT12 scores compared to those from higher socioeconomic strata. Furthermore, a higher reliance on NHS funding was observed among the most deprived, while more affluent patients predominantly opted for private funding. These findings underscore the significant influence of socioeconomic status on both the quality of healthcare received and recovery outcomes in hip preservation surgery, calling attention to the need for more equitable healthcare solutions

The SPAIRE technique (Saving Piriformis And Internus, Repair Externus) was first described in 2016 and an approach to the hip in the interval between the inferior gemellus and quadratus femoris can be used for both hemi- and total hip arthroplasty. The HemiSPAIRE technique in hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures has been compared with the standard lateral approach (advocated by NICE) in a pragmatic, superiority, multicentre, randomised controlled trial into postoperative mobility and function. This NIHR funded study was recruited between November 2019 and April 2022 and the results are reported in this presentation. The author has used the SPAIRE technique in 1026 routine primary total hip replacements since February 2016. The technique is described along with results from NJR data. SPAIRE is most challenging in patients with small anatomy, reduced offset, with an external rotation deformity. Particularly in these, but in all cases, MAKO robotic assistance facilitates accurate implantation of prostheses and precise recreation of biomechanics. The MAKO robot has been used in all cases since 2018 and SPAIRE/MAKO is now the standard of care in the author's practice. To evaluate whether robotic-assisted tendon-sparing posterior approaches (piriformis sparing and SPAIRE), improve patient outcomes in total hip arthroplasty compared with a robotic-assisted standard posterior approach, the NIHR Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme has recently funded the HIPSTER trial (HIP Surgical Techniques to Enhance Rehabilitation). This is a single-centre, double-blinded, parallel three-arm, randomised, controlled, superiority trial; recruitment is in progress. The greatest value of robotic assistance may be when it is used in combination with tendon-sparing surgery. Data is being gathered to evaluate whether the SPAIRE/MAKO technique confers benefits with regard the speed of post-op mobilisation as well as accelerated return to unrestricted function

Current treatment options for displaced acetabular fractures in elderly patients include non-surgical management, surgical fixation and surgical fixation with simultaneous hip replacement, the so-called “fix-and-replace”™. There remains a paucity of evidence to guide surgeons in decision making for these difficult injuries. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of performing an appropriately powered RCT between treatment options for acetabular fractures in older patients. This was an NIHR funded feasibility triple-arm RCT with participation from 7 NHS MTCs. Patients older than 60 were recruited if they had an acetabular fracture deemed sufficiently displaced for the treating surgeon to consider surgical fixation. Randomisation was performed on a 1:1:1 basis. The three treatment arms were non-surgical management, surgical fixation and fix-and-replace. Feasibility was assessed by willingness of patients to participate and clinicians to recruit, drop out rate, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation for the full trial and completion rates to inform design of a future definitive trial. EQ-5D was the primary outcome measure at 6 months, OHS and Disability Rating Index were secondary outcome measures. Of 117 eligible patients, 60 were randomised whilst 50 declined study participation. Nine patients did not receive their allocated intervention. Analysis was performed on an intention to treat basis. During the study period 4 patients withdrew before final review, 4 patients died and 1 was lost to follow-up. The estimated sample size for a full scale study was calculated to be 1474 participants for an EQ-5D MCID of 0.06 with a power of 0.8. This feasibility study suggests a full scale trial would require international collaboration. This study also has provided observed safety data regarding mortality and morbidity for the fix-and-replace procedure to aid surgeons in the decision-making process when considering treatment options

Total hip replacement (THR) is one of the most common and cost-effective elective surgical procedures. In the National Health Service (NHS) of England and Wales a myriad of implants for THR are offered at a variety of locally negotiated prices. This study aims to estimate the total burden of elective THR to the NHS, expenditure on implants, and different scenarios of cost changes if implant selection changed for different patient groups. Using National Joint Registry (NJR) data and NHS reference costs, we estimated the number and expenditure of NHS funded primary and revision THR in the 10-year period 2008–2017 and forecasted the number and expenditure on THR over the next decade. Using NJR average NHS Trust prices for the different implant combinations we estimated the average cost of implants used in THRs and estimated the budget impact on NHS providers from switching to alternative implants. The NHS spent over £4.76 billion performing 702,381 THRs between 2008–2017. The average cost of implants was £1,260 per surgery, almost a fifth of the cost of primary THR. Providing cemented implant combinations in primary elective THRs may potentially save up to £281 million over the next 10 years, whilst keeping 10-year revision risks low. The NHS is likely to spend over £5.6 billion providing primary elective THR over the next decade. There are efficiency savings to realise in the NHS by switching to more cost-effective implant combinations available for patients undergoing primary elective THR surgery, but these will need to be balanced against the risks inherent to a change in selection of implants and surgical practice. The HIPPY programme will be conducting practice surveys, discrete choice experiments and a large randomised controlled trial of cemented, uncemented and hybrid fixation in THR for patients under 70 to answer uncertainties

The increased demand for total hip arthroplasty (THA) is having a significant impact on healthcare resources, resulting in increased interest in outpatient care pathways to reduce resource consumption. This study compared costs between patients who underwent outpatient THA using a Direct Anterior (DA) approach compared to a Direct Lateral (DL) approach to understand the effect of surgical approach on resource use. We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial for DA patients undergoing primary THA. We compared patients in the outpatient arm of the trial to a prospective cohort of outpatient DL approach THAs. We recorded all costs including: equipment, length of stay in hospital, and laboratory or other medical tests. Following discharge, participants also completed a self-reported cost diary recording resource utilization such as emergency department visits or subsequent hospitalizations, tests and procedures, consultations or follow-up, healthcare professional services, rehabilitation, use of pain medications, informal care, productivity losses and out of pocket expenditures. We report costs from both Canadian public health care payer (HCP) and a societal perspective. The HCP perspective includes any direct health costs covered by the publicly funded system. In addition to the health care system costs, the societal perspective also includes additional costs to the patient (e.g. physiotherapy, medication, or assistive devices), as well as any indirect costs such as time off paid employment for patients or caregivers. We included 127 patients in the DA group (66.6 years old) and 51 patients in the DL group (59.4 years old) (p<0.01). There were no statistically significant differences in costs between groups from both the healthcare payer (DA= 7910.19, DL= 7847.17, p=0.80) and societal perspectives (DA= 14657.21, DL= 14581.21, p=0.96). In patients undergoing a successful outpatient hip replacement, surgical approach does not have an effect on cost from in hospital or societal perspectives

Hip fracture represents a significant challenge, placing increasing pressure on health and social care services in Scotland. This study establishes the ‘historic’ hip fracture burden, namely, the annual number of hip fractures in Scotland, and respective incidence, between 2017 – 2021. Furthermore, the ‘projected’ hip fracture burden and incidence from 2022 – 2029 was estimated, to inform future capacity and funding of health and social care services. The number of individuals with a hip fracture in Scotland between 2017 and 2021 was identified through the Scottish Hip Fracture Audit, enabling the annual number of hip fractures and respective incidence between 2017 – 2021 to be calculated. Projection modelling was performed using Exponential Smoothing and Auto Regressive Integrated Moving Average to estimate the number of hip fractures occurring annually from 2022 – 2029. A combined average projection was employed to provide a more accurate forecast. Accounting for predicted changes within the population demographics of Scotland, the projected hip fracture incidence up to 2029 was calculated. Between 2017 and 2021 the annual number of hip fractures in Scotland increased from 6675 to 7797 (15%), with an increase in incidence from 313 to 350 per 100,000 (11%) of the at-risk population. Hip fracture was observed to increase across all groups, notably males, and the 70–79 and 80–89 age cohorts. By 2029, the combined average projection estimated the annual number of hip fractures at 10311, with an incidence rate of 463 per 100,000, representing a 32% increase from 2021. The largest percentage increase in hip fracture by 2029 occurs in the 70–79 and 80–89 age cohorts (57% and 53% respectively). Based upon these projections, overall length of hospital stay following hip fracture will increase by 60699 days per annum by 2029, incurring an additional cost of at least £25 million. Projection modelling demonstrates the annual number of hip fractures in Scotland will increase substantially by 2029, with significant implications for health and social care services. This increase in hip fracture burden and incidence is influenced strongly by changing population demographics, primarily an ageing population

Waiting times for arthroplasty surgery in Northern Ireland are among the longest in the National Health Service, which have been further lengthened by the onset of the SARS-CoV-19 global pandemic in March 2020. The Department of Health (DoH) in Northern Ireland has announced a new Elective Care Framework (ECF), with the framework proposing that by March 2026 no patient will wait more than 52 weeks for inpatient/day case treatment. We aimed to assess the feasibility of achieving this with reference to Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Waiting list information was obtained via a Freedom of Information request to the DoH (May 2021) and National Joint Registry data was used to determine baseline operative numbers. Mathematical modelling was undertaken to calculate the time taken to meet the ECF target and also to determine the time to clear the waiting lists for THA using the number of patients currently on the waiting list and percentage operating capacity relative to pre-Covid-19 capacity to determine future projections. As of May 2021, there were 3,757 patients awaiting primary THA in Northern Ireland. Prior to April 2020, there were a mean 2,346 patients/annum added to the waiting list for primary THA and there were a mean 1,624 primary THAs performed per annum. The ECF targets for THA will only be achieved in 2026 if operating capacity is 200% of pre COVID-19 pandemic capacity and will be achieved in 2030 if capacity is 170%. Surgical capacity must exceed pre-Covid capacity by at least 30% to meet ongoing demand. THA capacity was significantly reduced following resumption of elective orthopaedics post-COVID-19 (22% of pre-COVID-19 capacity – 355 THAs/annum post-COVID-19 versus 1,624/annum pre-COVID-19). This modelling demonstrates that, in the absence of major funding and reorganisation of elective orthopaedic care, the targets set out in the ECF will not be achieved with regards to hip arthroplasty. Waiting times for THA surgery in the NHS in Northern Ireland are likely to remain greater than 52 weeks for most of this decade

Periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF) incidence following hip replacement surgery continues to rise. There is a national drive to centralise PFF treatment within specialist centres to improve clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness. The financial implications of treating PFFs must be analysed to guide allocation of funding. Data were collected for 129 PFFs admitted from 02/04/2014–19/05/2020. Financial data were provided by the Patient Level Information and Costing Systems (PLICS) team. Primary outcomes were cost, revenue and margin for each PFF. Additional data were collected on length of stay (LOS), critical care requirements and clinical outcomes. Statistical comparisons were made between treatment type (fixation vs revision). Significance was set to p<0.05. Across the entire cohort, total cost was £2,389,901, total revenue was £1,695,435 and total loss was £694,481. Highest costs were ward stay (£714,591), theatre utilisation (£382,625), and overheads (£249,110). Median cost was £15,863 (IQR, £11,092-£22,221), median revenue was £11,305 (IQR, £7,147-£15,222) and median loss was £3,795 (IQR, £605-£8687). Median LOS was 21 days (IQR 13–34) and 28.7% patients required critical care admission. Ninety-six patients were treated operatively with either fixation (n=53) or revision (n=43). Median operating time was lower for fixation versus revision (132 [IQR, 115–185] vs 201 [IQR, 159–229] minutes, p=0.001). Median cost (£17,455 [IQR, £13,095-£22,824] vs £17,399 [£13,394-£23,404]) and median loss (£5,774 [IQR, £2,092-£10,472] vs £3,860 [IQR, £96-£7,601]) were similar for fixation and revision (p=0.99 and p=0.18, respectively). Median revenue was greater for revision versus fixation (£13,925 [IQR, £11,294-£17,037] vs £12,160 [IQR, £8,486-£14,390], p=0.02). There was no difference in LOS (21 [13–34] vs 21 [14–30] days, p=0.94), critical care requirements (20 [37.7%] vs 11 [25.6%], p=0.30), reoperations (3 [5.7%] vs 6 [14.0%], p=0.29], local complications (8 [15.1%) vs 12 [27.9%], p=0.20) or systemic complications (11 [20.8%] vs 11 [25.6%], p=0.75) between fixation and revision. PFF treatment costs are high with inadequate reimbursement through tariff. Work is needed to address this disparity and reduce costs associated with LOS, theatre utilisation and implants. Treatment cost should not be used when deciding between fixation and revision surgery

Introduction. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an effective surgery for the treatment of advanced osteoarthritis but increasing numbers of these procedures are having a significant impact on healthcare budgets. One route to mitigate the increasing costs is outpatient THA, discharging patients on the same day as their surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine the cost of outpatient THA compared to standard overnight stay in hospital. Methods. This was a prospective-randomized controlled trial for patients undergoing primary THA through a direct anterior approach. Participants were randomized to be discharged on the same day as surgery, as outpatients, or on day one post-surgery, as inpatients, using a Zelen consent model. Adverse events were assessed, and participants completed self-reported cost questionnaires at two-, six- and 12-weeks post-surgery, and the WOMAC preoperatively and at 12-weeks post-surgery. We performed a cost analysis from health care payer (HCP) and societal perspectives. Results. 106 patients were enrolled in this study, with 50 randomized to outpatient and 56 randomized to inpatient THA. Seven patients from the outpatient group and five patients from the inpatient group crossed-over. Adverse event rate was similar between the groups with seven events in four participants in the inpatient group and three events in two participants in the outpatient group. WOMAC scores were not significantly different between the groups (p=0.12). From both a HCP and societal perspective, inpatient THA was more costly than outpatient THA. The cost difference was $3,353.15 for HCP (p<0.0001) and $3,703.30 for societal (p=0.003) in favour of outpatient THA. Conclusion. Our results suggest that outpatient THA is a cost-saving procedure when compared to inpatient THA from both HCP and societal perspectives. We will continue recruitment to investigate whether these results hold true in a larger sample as well as assess for cost-effectiveness, patient safety and satisfaction. Acknowledgements. This study was supported by the Opportunities Fund of the Academic Health Sciences Centre Alternative Funding Plan of the Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario (AMOSO). We also received funding from the PSI Foundation. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

The rising prevalence of osteoarthritis, associated with an ageing population, is expected to deliver increasing demand across Scotland for arthroplasty services in the future. Understanding the scale of potential change to operative workflow is essential to ensure adequate provision of services and prevent prolonged waiting times that can cause patient harm. This future service demand for primary and revision hip arthroplasty across Scotland, and the rest of the U.K., is hitherto unknown. We set out to provide projections of future primary & revision hip arthroplasty out to 2038 utilising historical trend data (2008–2018) from the Scottish Arthroplasty Project. All analyses were performed using the Holt's exponential smoothing projection method with the forecast package in R statistics. Results were adjusted for projected future population estimates provided by National Records of Scotland. Independent age & sex group predictions were also performed. All results are presented per 100,000 population at-risk per year (/100k/year). The predicted rise of primary hip arthroplasty for all ages is from 120/100k/year in 2018 to 152/100k/year in 2038, a 27% increase. Based on a static 3 day length of stay average this would see 4280 additional patient bed days required for primary hip arthroplasty patients per annum. The number of revision hip arthroplasty procedures for all ages is projected to fall from 14/100k/year to 4/100k/year based on historical trend data. This does not however take into account the suspect increase in primary arthroplasty numbers that is likely to influence future revision rates. Anticipated future demand for primary hip arthroplasty will require significant additional resource and funding to prevent deterioration in quality of care and an increase in patient wait times. Demand for revision arthroplasty is set to decrease, likely on account of improved implant materials, technique, and understanding of best practice to minimise complication risk. This doesn't however take into account the impact of the complex interaction between an increasing primary arthroplasty rate and revision risk. Understanding presented projections of changes to arthroplasty demand is key to future service delivery

Background. National hip fracture programmes are becoming widespread, but this practice is nascent and varied. The Scottish Hip Fracture Audit (SHFA) was an early adopter of this strategy and is credited with substantial systemic improvements in quality and outcomes. Objectives. To provide evidence and incentive to clinicians and administrators to adopt successful improvement strategies, and to facilitate data-driven change hip fracture care. Study Design and Methods. We reviewed the practice of seven national hip fracture improvement programmes in: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Scotland, and Ireland. We report our experience from the SHFA and describe: the results of our programme; challenges and learning points encountered, and successful strategies for implementing change. Results. There is variance in approach to data collection and reporting, for example: standalone programmes versus combined trauma and arthroplasty registries; annual trend reporting versus ‘snapshot’ or real-time information; population-level versus patient-level data, and the emphasis placed on service-level characteristics. The governance model also varies – some act as a passive data registry whereas others act as active agents of change and regulation. There is consensus on the key performance makers: prompt admission; early surgery and mobilisation, and a multidisciplinary approach. There have been significant challenges encountered by the SHFA with respect to funding, logistical, and political issues. Analysis of the effects of our programme have demonstrated its clinical efficacy, and has identified successful strategies for improvement. We describe this experience. Conclusions. The establishment of national audit programmes has resulted in significant improvements in quality, efficiency, and outcomes. This study of major national programmes provides evidence, incentive, and instruction to clinicians and administrators who seek to improve healthcare systems

Aims

Achieving accurate implant positioning and restoring native hip biomechanics are key surgeon-controlled technical objectives in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The primary objective of this study was to compare the reproducibility of the planned preoperative centre of hip rotation (COR) in patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted THA versus conventional THA.

Aims

The burden of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) continues to grow. The surgery is complex and associated with significant costs. Regional rTHA networks have been proposed to improve outcomes and to reduce re-revisions, and therefore costs. The aim of this study was to accurately quantify the cost and reimbursement for a rTHA service, and to assess the financial impact of case complexity at a tertiary referral centre within the NHS.

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.

Aims

This study compares the re-revision rate and mortality following septic and aseptic revision hip arthroplasty (rTHA) in registry data, and compares the outcomes to previously reported data.

Aims

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is considered the preferred treatment for displaced proximal femoral neck fractures. However, in many countries this option is economically unviable. To improve outcomes in financially disadvantaged populations, we studied the technique of concomitant valgus hip osteotomy and operative fixation (VOOF). This prospective serial study compares two treatment groups: VOOF versus operative fixation alone with cannulated compression screws (CCSs).

Aims

The objective of this study was to compare the two-year migration and clinical outcomes of a new cementless hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated titanium acetabular shell with its previous version, which shared the same geometrical design but a different manufacturing process for applying the titanium surface.

Aims

Total hip arthroplasties (THAs) are performed by surgeons at various stages in training with varying levels of supervision, but we do not know if this is safe practice with comparable outcomes to consultant-performed THA. Our aim was to examine the association between surgeon grade, the senior supervision of trainees, and the risk of revision following THA.

Aims

The aim of the HIPGEN consortium is to develop the first cell therapy product for hip fracture patients using PLacental-eXpanded (PLX-PAD) stromal cells.

Aims

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful surgical procedures. The objectives of this study were to define whether there is a correlation between socioeconomic status (SES) and surgical complications after elective primary unilateral THA, and investigate whether access to elective THA differs within SES groups.