Aims. This study aimed to develop a virtual clinic for the purpose of reducing face-to-face orthopaedic consultations. Patients and Methods. 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. Results. A patient-reported 13-item questionnaire was developed covering pain, mobility, and activity. The radiology report included up to ten items (e.g. progressive periprosthetic bone loss) depending on the type of arthroplasty. The algorithm concludes in one of three outcomes: review at surgeon’s discretion (three to 12 months); see at next available clinic; or
We compared the length of hospitalisation, rate
of infection, dislocation of the hip and revision, and mortality following
primary hip and knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis in patients
with Alzheimer’s disease (n = 1064) and a matched control group
(n = 3192). The data were collected from nationwide Finnish health
registers. Patients with Alzheimer’s disease had a longer peri-operative
hospitalisation (median 13 days vs eight days,
p <
0.001) and an increased risk for hip revision with a hazard
ratio (HR) of 1.76 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 3.00).
Dislocation was the leading indication for revision. There was no
difference in the rates of infection, dislocation of the hip, knee revision
and short-term mortality. In
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
Valgus knee deformity can present a number of
unique surgical challenges for the total knee arthroplasty (TKA)
surgeon. Understanding the typical patterns of bone and soft-tissue pathology
in the valgus arthritic knee is critical for appropriate surgical
planning. This review aims to provide the knee arthroplasty surgeon
with an understanding of surgical management strategies for the
treatment of valgus knee arthritis. Lateral femoral and tibial deficiencies, contracted lateral soft
tissues, attenuated medial soft tissues, and multiplanar deformities
may all be present in the valgus arthritic knee. A number of classifications
have been reported in order to guide surgical management, and a variety
of surgical strategies have been described with satisfactory clinical
results. Depending on the severity of the deformity, a variety of
TKA implant designs may be appropriate for use. Regardless of an operating surgeon’s preferred surgical strategy,
adherence to a step-wise approach to deformity correction is advised. Cite this article:
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
In this systematic review, our aim was to explore
whether or not patients are able to return to athletic activity
following lower limb joint replacement. We also investigated any evidence
as to whether participation in athletic activity post-joint replacement
increases complications and reduces implant survival. A PubMed, Embase and Sports Discus search was performed using
the MeSH terms ‘Sport’, ‘Athletic’, ‘Athlete’, ‘Physical’, ‘Activity’,
‘Arthroplasty’, ‘Total Hip Replacement’, ‘Hip Resurfacing’, ‘Total
Knee Replacement’, ‘Unicompartmental Knee Replacement’ and ‘Unicondylar
Knee Replacement’. From this search, duplications were excluded,
the remaining abstracts were reviewed and any unrelated to the search
terms were excluded. The remaining abstracts had their full papers
reviewed. Following joint replacement, participation in sporting activity
is common principally determined by pre-operative patient activity
levels, BMI and patient age. The type of joint replaced is of less
significance. Total time spent performing activity does not change
but tends to be at a lower intensity. There is little evidence in
the literature of an association between high activity levels and
early implant failure. Cite this article:
The Oxford hip and knee scores (OHS and OKS)
are validated patient-reported outcome measures used in patients undergoing
total hip replacement (THR), hip resurfacing (HR), total knee replacement
(TKR) and unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). We analysed the
absolute OHS and OKS and change in scores following THR, HR, TKR,
and UKR performed at one specialist centre. All patients undergoing
and completing at least one Oxford score were eligible for inclusion
in the study which included 27 950 OHS and 19 750 OKS in 13 682
patients. Data were analysed using non-linear quantile regression.
The median absolute Oxford scores for THR, HR, TKR and UKR were
pre-operative 68.8% (15.0/48), 58.3% (20.0/48), 66.7% (16.0/48),
60.4% (19.0/48) respectively: and post-operative asymptote was 14.6%
(41.0/48), 5.8% (45.2/48), 31.2% (33.0/48), 29.2% (34.0/48). The
median asymptotic change from the pre-operative score for THR, HR,
TKR and UKR were 47.9% (23.0/48), 47.9% (23.0/48), 33.3% (16.0/48)
and 32.4% (15.5/48), respectively. The median time at which no further
appreciable change in score was achieved post-operatively was 0.7
years for THR, 1.1 years for HR, 0.9 years for TKR and 1.1 years
for UKR. The curves produced from this analysis could be used to educate
patients, and to audit the performance of a surgeon and an institution.
The time to achieve a stable improvement in outcome varied between
different types of joint replacement, which may have implications
for the timing of post-operative review. Cite this article:
Peri-prosthetic fracture after joint replacement in the lower limb is associated with significant morbidity. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) over a ten-year period using a population-based linked dataset. Between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 2008, 52 136 primary THRs, 8726 revision THRs, 44 511 primary TKRs, and 3222 revision TKRs were performed. Five years post-operatively, the rate of fracture was 0.9% after primary THR, 4.2% after revision THR, 0.6% after primary TKR and 1.7% after revision TKR. Comparison of survival analysis for all primary and revision arthroplasties showed peri-prosthetic fractures were more likely in females, patients aged >
70 and after revision arthroplasty. Female patients aged >
70 should be warned of a significantly increased risk of peri-prosthetic fracture after hip or knee replacement. The use of adjuvant medical treatment to reduce the effect of peri-prosthetic osteoporosis may be a direction of research for these patients.