There is an increasing incidence of revision for periprosthetic joint infection. The addition of vancomycin to beta-lactam antimicrobial prophylaxis in joint arthroplasty may reduce surgical site infections, however, the efficacy and safety have not been established.

This was a multicenter, double-blind, superiority, placebo-controlled trial. We randomized 4239 adult patients undergoing joint arthroplasty surgery to receive 1.5g vancomycin or normal saline placebo, in addition to standard cefazolin antimicrobial prophylaxis. The primary outcome was surgical site infection at 90-days from index surgery. Perioperative carriage of Staphylococcus species was also assessed.

In the 4113 patients included in the modified intention-to-treat population, surgical site infections occurred in 72/2069 (3.5%) in the placebo group and 91/2044 (4. 5%) in the vancomycin group (risk ratio 1.28; 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 1.73; p value 0.11). No difference was observed between the two groups for primary hip arthroplasty procedures. A higher proportion of infections occurred in knee arthroplasty patients in the vancomycin group (63/1109 [4.7%]) compared with the placebo group (42/1124 [3.7%]; risk ratio 1.52; 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 2.23; p value 0.031). Hypersensitivity reactions occurred in 11 (0.5%) patients in the placebo group and 24 (1.2%) in the vancomycin group (risk ratio 2.20; 95% confidence interval 1.08, 4.49) and acute kidney injury in 74 (3.7%) patients in the placebo group and 42 (2.1%) in the vancomycin group (risk ratio 0.57; 95% confidence interval 0.39, 0.83). Perioperative Staphylococcus aureus carriage was detected in 1089/3748 (29.1%) of patients.

This is the first randomized controlled trial examining the addition of a glycopeptide antimicrobial to standard beta-lactam surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis in joint arthroplasty. The addition of vancomycin to standard cefazolin prophylaxis was not superior to placebo for the prevention of surgical site infections in hip and knee arthroplasty surgery.

Many of the questionnaire based scoring systems (i.e. Rowe score) require some form of clinical assessment. These clinical components can be very difficult to perform on a large scale particularly when a patient lives a long distance from clinic. We have attempted to counter this problem by asking the patient to asses their own range of motion. The aim of this study was to test the agreement between patient and clinician measured shoulder external rotation range using a photo based self-assessment tool.

Fifty-one professional and semi-professional rugby players were recruited to assess shoulder external rotation range. Each player was presented with a photo based shoulder external rotation range self-assessment tool, which featured four photos of progressive shoulder external rotation in 2 positions, 900 abduction (150, 300, 450 & 600 of external rotation) and 00 abduction (700, 800, 900 & 1000 of external rotation). The players were asked to perform active external rotation in these two positions and mark the image which best matched their maximal external rotation. The player was then independently assessed using the same tool, by a clinician.

The difference between the player's and the clinician's assessment was analysed using a weighted Kappa test. The Kappa for the shoulder external rotation in 900 abduction was 0.75 and 0.71 for left and right respectively, and 0.57 and 0.55 for shoulder external rotation in 00 abduction. Thus, the strength of agreement between the player's and clinician's assessment of shoulder external rotation is good in 900 abduction and moderate in 00 abduction.

These results demonstrate that the photo-based shoulder external rotation range self-assessment tool is a very useful addition to researchers' and clinicians' toolkits and may be most useful when a patient lives a great distance from/or is unable to attend a clinic.