This study describes the variation in the annual volumes of revision hip arthroplasty (RHA) undertaken by consultant surgeons nationally, and the rate of accrual of RHA and corresponding primary hip arthroplasty (PHA) volume for new consultants entering practice. National Joint Registry (NJR) data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man were received for 84,816 RHAs and 818,979 PHAs recorded between April 2011 and December 2019. RHA data comprised all revision procedures, including first-time revisions of PHA and any subsequent re-revisions recorded in public and private healthcare organizations. Annual procedure volumes undertaken by the responsible consultant surgeon in the 12 months prior to every index procedure were determined. We identified a cohort of ‘new’ HA consultants who commenced practice from 2012 and describe their rate of accrual of PHA and RHA experience.Aims
Methods
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. A retrospective analysis of all revision hip procedures was performed at this centre over two consecutive financial years (2018 to 2020). Cases were classified according to the Revision Hip Complexity Classification (RHCC) and whether they were infected or non-infected. Patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade ≥ III or BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2 are considered “high risk” by the RHCC. Costs were calculated using the Patient Level Information and Costing System (PLICS), and remuneration based on Healthcare Resource Groups (HRG) data. The primary outcome was the financial difference between tariff and cost per patient episode.Aims
Methods
The aim of this modified Delphi process was to create a structured Revision Hip Complexity Classification (RHCC) which can be used as a tool to help direct multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussions of complex cases in local or regional revision networks. The RHCC was developed with the help of a steering group and an invitation through the British Hip Society (BHS) to members to apply, forming an expert panel of 35. We ran a mixed-method modified Delphi process (three rounds of questionnaires and one virtual meeting). Round 1 consisted of identifying the factors that govern the decision-making and complexities, with weighting given to factors considered most important by experts. Participants were asked to identify classification systems where relevant. Rounds 2 and 3 focused on grouping each factor into H1, H2, or H3, creating a hierarchy of complexity. This was followed by a virtual meeting in an attempt to achieve consensus on the factors which had not achieved consensus in preceding rounds.Aims
Methods
Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) can be complex and associated with significant cost, with an increasing burden within the UK and globally. Regional rTHA networks have been proposed aiming to improve outcomes, reduce re-revisions and therefore costs. The aim of this study was to accurately quantify the cost and reimbursement for the rTHA service and to assess the financial impact of case complexity at a tertiary referral centre within the NHS. A retrospective analysis of all revision hip procedures was performed over two consecutive financial years (2018–2020). Cases were classified according to the Revision Hip Complexity Classification (RHCC) and by mode of failure; infected or non-infected. Patients of ASA grade of 3 or greater or BMI over 40 are considered “high-risk” by the RHCC. Costs were calculated using PLICS and remuneration based on the HRG data. The primary outcome was the financial difference between tariff and cost per episode per patient. Comparisons between groups were analysed using analysis of variance and two-tailed unpaired 199 revision episodes were identified in 168 patients: 25 (13%) least complex revisions (H1), 110 (55%) complex revisions (H2) and 64 (32%) most complex revisions (H3). 76 (38%) cases were due to infection. 78 (39%) of patients were in the “high-risk” group. Median length of stay increased with case complexity from 4, to 6 to 8 days (p=0.17) and significantly for revisions performed for infection (9 vs 5 days; p=0.01). Cost per episode increased significantly between complexity groups (p=0.0002) and for infected revisions (p=0.003). All groups demonstrated a mean deficit, but this significantly increased with revision complexity (£301, £1,820 and £4,757 per case; p=0.02) and for infected failure (£4,023 vs £1,679; p=0.02). The total deficit to the trust for the two-years was £512,202. Current NHS reimbursement for rTHA is inadequate and should be more closely aligned to complexity. An increase in the most complex rTHA at major revision centres (MRC) will likely place a greater financial burden on these units.
Orthopaedic theatres can be noisy. Noise exposure is known to be related to reduced cognition, reduced manual dexterity and increased rates of post-operative wound infection. Up to 50% of orthopaedic theatre staff have features of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) with higher levels in consultants compared to registrars. Exposure to noise levels of 90dB(A) at work for a career of 40 years, equates to a 51% risk of hearing loss. A Casella CEL-242 meter was positioned in the corner of the theatre tent. Recordings were taken for 17 Total Knee Replacements (TKRs) and 11 Total Hip Replacements (THRs). This meter recorded the decibel level once per second (whereas EU Regulation requires equivalent continuous level measurement).Introduction
Materials & methods
Data on the outcome of THA in patients under the age of 30 years is sparse. There is a perceived reluctance to offer surgery to young patients on the basis of potential early failure of the implant. We aim to review our experience with THA in this group of patients to establish outcomes in a high volume specialist arthroplasty unit. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from the Lower Limb Arthroplasty Unit of patients who underwent THA <30 years of age between 1989–2009 was undertaken. Ninety five patients (117 THAs) were identified but 25 patients (27 hips) were excluded for lack of clinical records and 6 patients (9 hips) for follow up of <5 years. Clinical records were reviewed for patients’ age at operation, underlying pathology, details of operation and any failures (revision). Radiographs were reviewed for any evidence of loosening and wear of the components. Functional assessment was also carried out using the modified Hip disability & osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), Oxford hip score and EQ5D–5L.Introduction
Material & methods
An extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) is a widely used approach for revision hip arthroplasty. Following an ETO it is common practice to use a long stemmed femoral prosthesis at the second stage to bypass the osteotomy. We propose that at the second stage, if the osteotomy has united, it is appropriate to use a standard length prosthesis, which preserves bone stock for any future revisions. We performed a retrospective review of our institution's prospective arthroplasty database, identifying all patients who had undergone an ETO at the first stage revision. A radiograph review was then performed and any subsequent complications recorded. A selection of patients radiographs were individually reviewed by three reviewers and intra-class correlation (ICC) was performed to assess intra-observer reliability.Background
Methods
