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:
Primary arthroplasty may be denied to very elderly patients based upon the perceived outcome and risks associated with surgery. This prospective study compared the outcome, complications, and mortality of total hip (TKR) and total knee replacement (TKR) in a prospectively selected group of patients aged ≥ 80 years with that of a control group aged between 65 and 74 years. There were 171 and 495 THRs and 185 and 492 TKRs performed in the older and control groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the mean improvement of Oxford hip and knee scores between the groups at 12 months (0.98, (95% confidence interval (CI) −0.66 to 2.95), p = 0.34 and 1.15 (95% CI −0.65 to 2.94), p = 0.16, respectively). The control group had a significantly (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively) greater improvement in the physical well being component of their SF-12 score, but the older group was more satisfied with their THR (p = 0.047). The older group had a longer hospital stay for both THR (5.9
