Surgical costs are a major component of healthcare expenditures in the USA. Intraoperative communication is a key factor contributing to patient outcomes. However, the effectiveness of communication is only partially determined by the surgeon, and understanding how non-surgeon personnel affect intraoperative communication is critical for the development of safe and cost-effective staffing guidelines. Operative efficiency is also dependent on high-functioning teams and can offer a proxy for effective communication in highly standardized procedures like primary total hip and knee arthroplasty. We aimed to evaluate how the composition and dynamics of surgical teams impact operative efficiency during arthroplasty. We performed a retrospective review of staff characteristics and operating times for 112 surgeries (70 primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and 42 primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs)) conducted by a single surgeon over a one-year period. Each surgery was evaluated in terms of operative duration, presence of surgeon-preferred staff, and turnover of trainees, nurses, and other non-surgical personnel, controlling cases for body mass index, presence of osteoarthritis, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to give estimates of the incidence of component incompatibility in hip and knee arthroplasty and to test the effect of an online, real-time compatibility check. Intraoperative barcode registration of arthroplasty implants was introduced in Denmark in 2013. We developed a compatibility database and, from May 2017, real-time compatibility checking was implemented and became part of the registration. We defined four classes of component incompatibility: A-I, A-II, B-I, and B-II, depending on an assessment of the level of risk to the patient (A/B), and on whether incompatibility was knowingly accepted (I/II).Aims
Materials and Methods
To evaluate the effectiveness of an institutionally developed
algorithm for evaluation and diagnosis of prosthetic joint injection
and to determine the impact of this protocol on overall hospital
re-admissions.p We retrospectively evaluated 2685 total hip arthroplasty (THA)
and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients prior to (1263) and following
(1422) the introduction of an infection detection protocol. The
protocol used conservative thresholds for C-reactive protein to
direct the medical attendant to aspirate the joint. The protocol
incorporated a clear set of laboratory and clinical criteria that
allowed a patient to be discharged home if all were met. Patients were
included if they presented to our emergency department within 120
days post-operatively with concerns for swelling, pain or infection
and were excluded if they had an unambiguous infection or if their
chief complaint was non-orthopaedic in nature.Aims
Patients and Methods
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating
complication for patients and results in greatly increased costs
of care for both healthcare providers and patients. More than 15
500 revision hip and knee procedures were recorded in England, Wales
and Northern Ireland in 2013, with infection accounting for 13%
of revision hip and 23% of revision knee procedures. We report our experience of using antibiotic eluting absorbable
calcium sulphate beads in 15 patients (eight men and seven women
with a mean age of 64.8 years; 41 to 83) as part of a treatment
protocol for PJI in revision arthroplasty. The mean follow-up was 16 months (12 to 22). We report the outcomes
and complications, highlighting the risk of hypercalcaemia which
occurred in three patients. We recommend that serum levels of calcium be routinely sought
following the implantation of absorbable calcium sulphate beads
in orthopaedic surgery. Cite this article:
Older patients with multiple medical co-morbidities
are increasingly being offered and undergoing total joint arthroplasty
(TJA). These patients are more likely to require intensive care
support, following surgery. We prospectively evaluated the need
for intensive care admission and intervention in a consecutive series
of 738 patients undergoing elective hip and knee arthroplasty procedures.
The mean age was 60.6 years (18 to 91; 440 women, 298 men. Risk
factors, correlating with the need for critical care intervention,
according to published guidelines, were analysed to identify high-risk
patients who would benefit from post-operative critical care monitoring.
A total of 50 patients (6.7%) in our series required critical care
level interventions during their hospital stay. Six independent
multivariate clinical predictors were identified (p <
0.001)
including a history of congestive heart failure (odds ratio (OR)
24.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.51 to 61.91), estimated blood
loss >
1000 mL (OR 17.36, 95% CI 5.36 to 56.19), chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease (13.90, 95% CI 4.78 to 40.36), intra-operative
use of vasopressors (OR 8.10, 95% CI 3.23 to 20.27), revision hip
arthroplasty (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.04) and body mass index
>
35 kg/m2 (OR 2.70, 95% CI 123 to 5.94). The model was
then validated against an independent, previously published data
set of 1594 consecutive patients. The use of this risk stratification
model can be helpful in predicting which high-risk patients would
benefit from a higher level of monitoring and care after elective
TJA and aid hospitals in allocating precious critical care resources. 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:
