The aim of this study was to identify predictors of return to
work (RTW) after revision lower limb arthroplasty in patients of
working age in the United Kingdom. We assessed 55 patients aged ≤ 65 years after revision total
hip arthroplasty (THA). There were 43 women and 12 men with a mean
age of 54 years (23 to 65). We also reviewed 30 patients after revision
total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There were 14 women and 16 men with
a mean age of 58 years (48 to 64). Preoperatively, age, gender,
body mass index, social deprivation, mode of failure, length of
primary implant survival, work status and nature, activity level
(University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score), and Oxford
Hip and Knee Scores were recorded. Postoperatively, RTW status,
Oxford Hip and Knee Scores, EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), UCLA score, and
Work, Osteoarthritis and Joint-Replacement Questionnaire (WORQ)
scores were obtained. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed.Aims
Patients and Methods
The results of hip and knee replacement surgery
are generally regarded as positive for patients. Nonetheless, they are
both major operations and have recognised complications. We present
a review of relevant claims made to the National Health Service
Litigation Authority. Between 1995 and 2010 there were 1004 claims
to a value of £41.5 million following hip replacement surgery and
523 claims to a value of £21 million for knee replacement. The most common
complaint after hip surgery was related to residual neurological
deficit, whereas after knee replacement it was related to infection.
Vascular complications resulted in the highest costs per case in
each group. Although there has been a large increase in the number of operations
performed, there has not been a corresponding relative increase
in litigation. The reasons for litigation have remained largely
unchanged over time after hip replacement. In the case of knee replacement,
although there has been a reduction in claims for infection, there
has been an increase in claims for technical errors. There has also
been a rise in claims for non-specified dissatisfaction. This information
is of value to surgeons and can be used to minimise the potential
mismatch between patient expectation, informed consent and outcome. Cite this article:
We have investigated the accuracy of the templating of digital radiographs in planning total hip replacement using two common object-based calibration methods with the ball placed laterally (method 1) or medially (method 2) and compared them with two non-object-based methods. The latter comprised the application of a fixed magnification of 121% (method 3) and calculation of magnification based on the object-film-distance (method 4). We studied the post-operative radiographs of 57 patients (19 men, 38 women, mean age 73 years (53 to 89)) using the measured diameter of the prosthetic femoral head and comparing it with the true value. Both object-based methods (1 and 2) produced large errors (mean/maximum: 2.55%/17.4% and 2.04%/6.46%, respectively). Method 3 applying a fixed magnification and method 4 (object-film-distance) produced smaller errors (mean/maximum 1.42%/5.22% and 1.57%/4.24%, respectively; p <
0.01). The latter results were clinically relevant and acceptable when planning was allowed to within one implant size. Object-based calibration (methods 1 and 2) has fundamental problems with the correct placement of the calibration ball. The accuracy of the fixed magnification (method 3) matched that of object-film-distance (method 4) and was the most reliable and efficient calibration method in digital templating.