Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Applied filters
General Orthopaedics

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 104-B, Issue SUPP_12 | Pages 92 - 92
1 Dec 2022
Thibault J Grammatopoulos G Horton I Harris N Dodd-Moher M Papp S
Full Access

In patients admitted to hospital with a hip fracture, urinary issues are common. Despite guidelines that recommend avoiding foley catheter usage when possible, it remains a common part of perioperative care. To date, there is no prospective data on the safety and satisfaction associated with catheter use in such cohort. The aim of this study was to evaluate the satisfaction of patients when using a foley catheter while they await surgery for their fractured hip and the safety associated with catheter use.

In our prospectively collected database, 587 patients were admitted to our tertiary care center over a 1 year period. Most patients (328) were catheterized within the first 24h of admission, primarily inserted in ED. Of these patients, 119 patients (61 catheterized and 58 noncatheterized) completed a questionnaire about their perioperative management with foley catheter usage administered on day 1 of admission. This was used to determine satisfaction of catheter use (if catheterized) and pain levels (associated with catheterized or associated with transferring/voiding if not catheterized). Adverse effects related with catheter use included urinary tract infection (UTI) and post-operative urinary retention (POUR).

Ninety-five percent of patients found the catheter to be convenient. Only 5% of patients reported any pain with catheter use. On the contrary, 47.5% of non-catheterized patients found it difficult to move to the bathroom and 30.4% found it difficult to urinate. Catheterized patients had significative less pain than uncatheterized patients (0.62/10 vs 2.45/10 respectively, p < 0 .001). The use of nerve block reduced pain levels amongst catheterized patients but was not associated with reduced pain levels or satisfaction amongst non-catheterized patients. The use of catheter was not associated with increased risk of UTI(17.5% in the catheterized vs 13.3% in the non-catheterized, p = 0.541) or POUR (6.8% in the catheterized vs 11.1% in the non-catheterized, p = 0.406).

This study illustrates the benefits and safety associated with the use of urinary catheters in the pre-operative period amongst hip fractures. The use of catheters was associated with reduced pain and satisfaction without increasing post-operative UTI or POUR. These findings suggest that pre-operative catheter use is associated with less pain and more satisfaction for patients awaiting hip surgery and whom other measures, such as nerve blocks, are unlikely to reduce the discomfort associated with the mobility required to void. A prospective randomized control study could lead to a more evidence based approach for perioperative foley catheter usage in hip fracture patients.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 102-B, Issue SUPP_8 | Pages 9 - 9
1 Aug 2020
Papp S Thomas S Harris N Salimian A Gartke K
Full Access

The clinical guidelines for hip fracture management indicate that indwelling foley catheterization should be avoided when possible. Alternatives to indwelling catheters such as intermittent or condom catheters are recommended. Appropriate catheterization usage is important in hip fracture patients to avoid complications such as urinary tract infections (UTIs) (7–24% of patients) or post-operative urinary retention (POUR) (20–56% of patients). In this study, we aim to, (1) evaluate catheter usage in hip fracture patients at a large tertiary care centre, (2) compare current practices in catheter usage to clinical guidelines, (3) determine the incidence of POUR in hip fracture patients (4) determine the factors that increase one's risk of developing POUR.

We analyzed 584 hip fracture patients between the ages of 18 and 102 admitted between November 2015 and October 2017 at a tertiary Care Hospital. Data collected included patient demographics, fracture pattern, surgical procedure, length of stay, co-morbidities and catheter use. We compared actual catheter usage to suggested guidelines to determine whether recommendations were being followed. We also investigated the incidence of POUR and risk factors associated with developing POUR. Independent samples t-test were used to compare continuous dependent variables in bivariate analyses and a logistic regression was used to determine predictors of developing POUR, catheter usage, and length of stay in multivariate analyses. T

Over three quarters (76.9%) of patients with hip fractures were treated with a catheter during their admission, 63.5% of which were inserted pre-operatively and 36.5% of which were inserted post-operatively. Indwelling catheters accounted for 92.2% of catheters used, while intermittent and catheter condoms accounted for 7.8%. POUR occurred in 98 of 584 cases (16.7%). Age (p = 0.004), gender (p=0.001), and presence of kidney disease (p=0.033) were statistically significant predictors of POUR. Fracture pattern (p=0.825), surgical procedure (p=0.298), diabetes mellitus (p=0.309) and UTI in the past 60 days (p=0.848) or on admission (p=0.999) were not statistically significant predictors of developing POUR. The development of POUR did not significantly increase length of stay (p=0.558). There was no statistically significant correlation between developing POUR and extended post-operative catheter use over 24 hours (p=0.844) or 48 hours (p=0.862). Patients who received a catheter pre-operatively or post-operatively for longer than 24 hours were not significantly more likely to develop POUR (p=0.057).

Catheter use was common for all hip fracture patients and indwelling catheters were used in the overwhelming majority of cases. The high frequency of catheter usage, and specifically indwelling catheter usage, suggests that there is low compliance with the clinical guidelines for hip fracture patients. The incidence of POUR was 17%. Older, male patients were more likely to develop POUR. Although not statistically significant, more appropriate catheter use may decrease urinary complications such as POUR.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 98-B, Issue SUPP_4 | Pages 18 - 18
1 Jan 2016
Brockett C Smyth A Day M Harris N Partridge S Williams S Fisher J
Full Access

Introduction

Total ankle replacement (TAR) has been used as a surgical intervention for arthritis since the 1970s. However, unlike clinically successful hip and knee replacements, TARs are renowned for extensive contraindications to surgery and high failure rates with an average of 83% survival at 5 years. The majority cite aseptic loosening as the reason for failure. The aim of this study wais to analyse retrieved TARs visually and through interferometry to identify potential the failure mechanisms associated with these devices.

Methods

Retrieved total ankle replacements (n=11) from consecutive revision surgeries carried out at Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds between August 2012 and January 2014, were collected for study at the University of Leeds, under an NRES approved procedure (09/H1307/60).

The bearing surfaces of the samples were visually inspected for evidence of damage and wear. The bearing surfaces between the tibial component and the flat surface of the polyethylene insert were then examined using a scanning white light interferometer (NP Flex, Bruker, USA). It was not possible to characterise the talar bearing surface or the inferior polyethylene surface at this stage through interferometry due to the curvature of the surface. The components were aligned and five sections on each of the surfaces measured. These sections represented; anterior-medial, anterior-lateral, posterior-medial, posterior lateral and central regions of the bearing surfaces. 3D roughness values were recorded, and the mean 3D surface roughness compared between implants. Measurements were taken on the medial and lateral aspects of the bearing surfaces to investigate whether damage was location specific. A coefficient of determination was calculated to assess the relationship between implantation time and surface roughness.