Aims. Access to joint replacement is being restricted for patients with comorbidities in a number of high-income countries. However, there is little evidence on the impact of comorbidities on outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of hip and knee arthroplasty in patients with and without comorbidities. Methods. In total, 312,079 hip arthroplasty and 328,753 knee arthroplasty patients were included. A total of 11 common comorbidities were identified in administrative hospital records. Safety risks were measured by assessing length of hospital stay (LOS) and 30-day emergency readmissions and mortality. Effectiveness outcomes were changes in Oxford Hip or Knee Scores (OHS/OKS) (scale from 0 (worst) to 48 (best)) and in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) (scale from 0 (death) to 1 (full health)) from immediately before, to six months after, surgery. Regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted mean differences (LOS, change in OHS/OKS/EQ-5D) and risk differences (readmissions and mortality). Results. Patients with comorbidities had a longer LOS and higher readmission and mortality rates than patients without. In hip arthroplasty patients with heart disease, for example, LOS was 1.20 days (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 1.25) longer and readmission rate was 1.52% (95% CI 1.34% to 1.71%) and mortality 0.19% (95% CI 0.15% to 0.23%) higher. Similar patterns were observed for knee arthroplasty patients. Patients without comorbidities reported large improvements in function (mean improvement OHS 21.3 (SD 9.91) and OKS 15.9 (SD 10.0)). Patients with comorbidities reported only slightly smaller improvements. In patients with heart disease, mean improvement in OHS was 0.39 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.51) and in OKS 0.56 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.67) less than in patients without comorbidities. There were no significant differences in EQ-5D improvement. Conclusion. Comorbidities were associated with small increases in adverse safety risks but they have little impact on pain or function in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. These results do not support restricting access to hip and knee arthroplasty for patients with common comorbidities. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):56–64

Aims

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.

Aims

Antifibrinolytic agents, including tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA), have been shown to be safe and effective for decreasing perioperative blood loss and transfusion following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there are few prospective studies that directly compare these agents. The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits of intraoperative intravenous TXA with EACA.

Aims

Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common complication of surgery with an incidence of about 1% in the United Kingdom. Sutures can lead to the development of a SSI, as micro-organisms can colonize the suture as it is implanted. Triclosan-coated sutures, being antimicrobical, were developed to reduce the rate of SSI. Our aim was to assess whether triclosan-coated sutures cause a reduction in SSIs following arthroplasty of the hip and knee.

If patients could recall their physical status before total hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (TKA) accurately it could have valuable applications both clinically and for research. This study evaluated the accuracy of a patient’s recollection one year after either THA or TKA using the Oxford hip or knee scores (OHS and OKS). In total, 113 patients (59 THA, 54 TKA) who had completed the appropriate score pre-operatively were asked to complete the score again at a mean of 12.4 months (standard deviation (sd) 0.8) after surgery, recalling their pre-operative state.

While there were no significant differences between the actual and recalled pre-operative scores (OHS mean difference 0.8, sd 6.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.82 to 2.42, p = 0.329; OKS mean difference -0.11, sd 7.34, 95% CI -2.11 to 1.89, p = 0.912), absolute differences were relatively large (OHS, 5.24; OKS, 5.41), correlation was weak (OHS r = 0.7, OKS r = 0.61) and agreement between actual and recalled responses for individual questions was poor in half of the OHS and two thirds of the OKS.

A patient’s recollection of pre-operative pain and function is inaccurate one year after THA or TKA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1070–5.

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: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1512–18.

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: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:622–8.