Most hip replacements are performed in an in-patient setting; however, there has been a shift in recent years in Canada towards doing more on an outpatient basis. In 2021–2022, 15.6% of hip replacements were performed as day surgeries compared to 0.7% in 2018–2019. This analysis will assess patient reported outcome measures of patients who had inpatient versus outpatient hip replacement surgery between 2018 and 2021. We analysed a retrospective sample of 4917 adult patients who had an elective primary unilateral hip replacement. Preoperative and three-month postoperative PROMs were completed - the Oxford Hip Score, EQD5L and patient satisfaction with the outcome were recorded. Patients who had an outpatient procedure were matched 1:1 with patients who are admitted to hospital for surgery based on age, sex and pre-COVID versus the COVID (March 15, 2020 as the start). Preoperative PROMs and Charlson Comorbidity Index were collected. T-tests and chi-square tests were used to assess the differences. The inpatient group on average was older, female and had a lower preoperative PROMs score and more comorbidities than the outpatient group. With cohort matching the sample consisted of 1244 patients. The inpatient and outpatient groups have similar Oxford scores, postoperative EQ-5D-5L scores and the proportion satisfied with their surgical results. The Oxford postoperative score was slightly higher in the outpatient group compared to the inpatient group; however, this is not clinically significant. We observed that outpatient protocols have no difference in patient satisfaction, self-reported functional outcomes and self-reported health-related quality of life three months after a hip replacement. Day surgery protocols represented potential solution to the challenges caused by the expected increase in demand for hip replacements. Our results demonstrated that patients do well clinically with day surgery procedures and there does not appear to be any detrimental effect on PROMs.
A randomized trial was designed to compare the outcome of ceramic-on-ceramic with ceramic on conventional polyethylene. These patients have been followed for 15 years. 58 hips in 57 patients under 60 years of age were randomized into one of two groups. Patients were blinded to the type of hip they received. Both groups of patients were treated routinely with prophylactic peri-operative antibiotics and low molecular weight Heparin. All patients were seen at six weeks, three months and annually after surgery. Clinical and radiologic assessment was carried out at each visit. Fifty-eight hips were available for analysis, 28 in the CoP group and 29 patients in the CoC group. Mean age of both groups was less than 45 years. There were seven revisions (16%) among the 58 patients enrolled in the study. In the CoP group four patients underwent revision with head and liner exchange for eccentric polyethylene wear 16 years post-implantation. In the CoC group one patient had a cup revision at 15 years for acute aseptic instability of the acetabulum; two additional patients in the CoC group had femoral head exchange, one for fracture and one for trunnion corrosion. Both occurred 14 years after the index surgery. Functional outcome scores showed no difference between the two groups at 15 years. Radiographically there was a statistically difference in wear between the two groups. This study demonstrates that both ceramic-on-ceramic and ceramic-on-polyethylene produce satisfactory functional results with low revision rates in young patients.
