Objectives. Wound complications are reported in up to 10% hip and knee arthroplasties and there is a proven association between wound complications and deep prosthetic infections. In this randomised controlled trial (RCT) we explore the potential benefits of a portable, single use, incisional negative pressure wound therapy dressing (iNPWTd) on wound exudate, length of stay (LOS), wound complications, dressing changes and cost-effectiveness following total hip and knee arthroplasties. Methods. A total of 220 patients undergoing elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasties were recruited into in a non-blinded RCT. For the final analysis there were 102 patients in the study group and 107 in the control group. Results. An improvement was seen in the study (iNPWTd) group compared to control in all areas. Peak post-surgical wound exudate was significantly reduced (p = 0.007). Overall LOS reduction (0.9 days, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.2 to 2.5) was not significant (p = 0.07) but there was a significant reduction in patients with extreme values of LOS in the iNPWTd group (Moses test, p = 0.003). There was a significantly reduced number of dressing changes (mean difference 1.7, 95% CI 0.8 to 2.5, p = 0.002), and a trend to a significant four-fold reduction in reported post-operative surgical wound complications (8.4% control; 2.0% iNPWTd, p = 0.06). Conclusions. Based on the results of this RCT incisional negative pressure wound therapy dressings have a beneficial role in patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty to achieve predictable length of stay, especially to eliminate excessive hospital stay, and minimise wound complications. Cite this article: S. L. Karlakki, A. K. Hamad, C. Whittall, N. M. Graham, R. D. Banerjee, J. H. Kuiper. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy dressings (iNPWTd) in routine primary hip and knee arthroplasties: A randomised controlled trial. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:328–337. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.58.BJR-2016-0022.R1

Objectives. We wanted to investigate regional variations in the organisms reported to be causing peri-prosthetic infections and to report on prophylaxis regimens currently in use across England. Methods. Analysis of data routinely collected by Public Health England’s (PHE) national surgical site infection database on elective primary hip and knee arthroplasty procedures between April 2010 and March 2013 to investigate regional variations in causative organisms. A separate national survey of 145 hospital Trusts (groups of hospitals under local management) in England routinely performing primary hip and/or knee arthroplasty was carried out by standard email questionnaire. Results. Analysis of 189 858 elective primary hip and knee arthroplasty procedures and 1116 surgical site infections found statistically significant variations for some causative organism between regions. There was a 100% response rate to the prophylaxis questionnaire that showed substantial variation between individual trust guidelines. A number of regimens currently in use are inconsistent with the best available evidence. Conclusions. The approach towards antibiotic prophylaxis in elective arthroplasty nationwide reveals substantial variation without clear justification. Only seven causative organisms are responsible for 89% of infections affecting primary hip and knee arthroplasty, which cannot justify such widespread variation between prophylactic antibiotic policies. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2015;4:181–189

Aims

To develop and validate patient-centred algorithms that estimate individual risk of death over the first year after elective joint arthroplasty surgery for osteoarthritis.