Prolonged waits for hip and knee arthroplasty have raised questions about the equity of current approaches to waiting list prioritization for those awaiting surgery. We therefore set out to understand key stakeholder (patient and surgeon) preferences for the prioritization of patients awaiting such surgery, in order to guide future waiting list redesign. A combined qualitative/quantitative approach was used. This comprised a Delphi study to first inform which factors patients and surgeons designate as important for prioritization of patients on hip and knee arthroplasty waiting lists, followed by a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to determine how the factors should be weighed against each other. Coefficient values for each included DCE attribute were used to construct a ‘priority score’ (weighted benefit score) that could be used to rank individual patients waiting for surgery based on their respective characteristics.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to report health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and joint-specific function in patients waiting for total hip or knee arthroplasty surgery (THA or TKA) in Northern Ireland, compared to published literature and a matched normal population. Secondary aims were to report emergency department (ED) and out-of-hours general practitioner (OOH GP) visits, new prescriptions of strong opioids, and new prescriptions of antidepressants while waiting. This was a cohort study of 991 patients on the waiting list for arthroplasty in a single Northern Ireland NHS trust: 497 on the waiting list for ≤ three months; and 494 waiting ≥ three years. Postal surveys included the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), visual analogue scores (EQ-VAS), and Oxford Hip and Knee scores to assess HRQoL and joint-specific function. Electronic records determined prescriptions since addition to the waiting list and patient attendances at OOH GP/EDs.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-sectional, observational cohort study of patients presenting for revision of a total hip, or total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, to understand current routes to revision surgery and explore differences in symptoms, healthcare use, reason for revision, and the revision surgery (surgical time, components, length of stay) between patients having regular follow-up and those without. Data were collected from participants and medical records for the 12 months prior to revision. Patients with previous revision, metal-on-metal articulations, or hip hemiarthroplasty were excluded. Participants were retrospectively classified as ‘Planned’ or ‘Unplanned’ revision. Multilevel regression and propensity score matching were used to compare the two groups.Aims
Methods
The primary aim was to assess the rate of postoperative COVID-19 following hip and knee arthroplasty performed in March 2020 in the UK. The secondary aims were to assess whether there were clinical factors associated with COVID-19 status, the mortality rate of patients with COVID-19, and the rate of potential COVID-19 in patients not presenting to healthcare services. A multicentre retrospective study was conducted of patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (1 March 2020 to 31 March 2020) with a minimum of 60 days follow-up. Patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, procedure type, primary or revision, length of stay (LOS), COVID-19 test status, and postoperative mortality were recorded. A subgroup of patients (n = 211) who had not presented to healthcare services after discharge were contacted and questioned as to whether they had symptoms of COVID-19.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to assess the quality of life of patients on the waiting list for a total hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (KA) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary aims were to assess whether length of time on the waiting list influenced quality of life and rate of deferral of surgery. During the study period (August and September 2020) 843 patients (THA n = 394, KA n = 449) from ten centres in the UK reported their EuroQol five dimension (EQ-5D) scores and completed a waiting list questionnaire (2020 group). Patient demographic details, procedure, and date when listed were recorded. Patients scoring less than zero for their EQ-5D score were defined to be in a health state “worse than death” (WTD). Data from a retrospective cohort (January 2014 to September 2017) were used as the control group.Aims
Methods
This study aimed to develop a virtual clinic for the purpose of reducing face-to-face orthopaedic consultations. Anonymized experts (hip and knee arthroplasty patients, surgeons, physiotherapists, radiologists, and arthroplasty practitioners) gave feedback via a Delphi Consensus Technique. This consisted of an iterative sequence of online surveys, during which virtual documents, made up of a patient-reported questionnaire, standardized radiology report, and decision-guiding algorithm, were modified until consensus was achieved. We tested the patient-reported questionnaire on seven patients in orthopaedic clinics using a ‘think-aloud’ process to capture difficulties with its completion.Aims
Patients and Methods
Increasing demand for total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA)
and associated follow-up has placed huge demands on orthopaedic
services. Feasible follow-up mechanisms are therefore essential. We conducted an audit of clinical follow-up decision-making for
THA/TKA based on questionnaire/radiograph review compared with local
practice of Arthroplasty Care Practitioner (ACP)-led outpatient
follow-up. In all 599 patients attending an ACP-led THA/TKA follow-up
clinic had a pelvic/knee radiograph, completed a pain/function questionnaire
and were reviewed by an ACP. An experienced orthopaedic surgeon
reviewed the same radiographs and questionnaires, without patient
contact or knowledge of the ACP’s decision. Each pathway classified
patients into: urgent review, annual monitoring, routine follow-up
or discharge. Aims
Methods
Whether patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria
should be investigated and treated before elective hip and knee replacement
is controversial, although it is a widespread practice. We conducted
a prospective observational cohort study with urine analyses before
surgery and three days post-operatively. Patients with symptomatic
urinary infections or an indwelling catheter were excluded. Post-discharge
surveillance included questionnaires to patients and general practitioners
at three months. Among 510 patients (309 women and 201 men), with
a median age of 69 years (16 to 97) undergoing lower limb joint
replacements (290 hips and 220 knees), 182 (36%) had pre-operative asymptomatic
bacteriuria, mostly due to We conclude that testing and treating asymptomatic urinary tract
colonisation before joint replacement is unnecessary. Cite this article:
Satisfaction with care is important to both patients
and to those who pay for it. The Net Promoter Score (NPS), widely
used in the service industries, has been introduced into the NHS
as the ‘friends and family test’; an overarching measure of patient
satisfaction. It assesses the likelihood of the patient recommending
the healthcare received to another, and is seen as a discriminator
of healthcare performance. We prospectively assessed 6186 individuals
undergoing primary lower limb joint replacement at a single university
hospital to determine the Net Promoter Score for joint replacements
and to evaluate which factors contributed to the response. Achieving pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, confidence interval
(CI) 1.83 to 2.49), the meeting of pre-operative expectation (OR
2.57, CI 2.24 to 2.97), and the hospital experience (OR 2.33, CI
2.03 to 2.68) are the domains that explain whether a patient would
recommend joint replacement services. These three factors, combined
with the type of surgery undertaken (OR 2.31, CI 1.68 to 3.17),
drove a predictive model that was able to explain 95% of the variation
in the patient’s recommendation response. Though intuitively similar,
this ‘recommendation’ metric was found to be materially different
to satisfaction responses. The difference between THR (NPS 71) and
TKR (NPS 49) suggests that no overarching score for a department
should be used without an adjustment for case mix. However, the
Net Promoter Score does measure a further important dimension to
our existing metrics: the patient experience of healthcare delivery. Cite this article:
The aim of this study was to perform a cost–utility
analysis of total hip (THR) and knee replacement (TKR). Arthritis is
a disabling condition that leads to long-term deterioration in quality
of life. Total joint replacement, despite being one of the greatest
advances in medicine of the modern era, has recently come under
scrutiny. The National Health Service (NHS) has competing demands,
and resource allocation is challenging in times of economic restraint. Patients
who underwent THR (n = 348) or TKR (n = 323) between January and
July 2010 in one Scottish region were entered into a prospective
arthroplasty database. A health–utility score was derived from the
EuroQol (EQ-5D) score pre-operatively and at one year, and was combined
with individual life expectancy to derive the quality-adjusted life years
(QALYs) gained. Two-way analysis of variance was used to compare
QALYs gained between procedures, while controlling for baseline
differences. The number of QALYs gained was higher after THR than
after TKR (6.5 Cite this article:
