Objectives. The annual incidence of hip fracture is 620 000 in the European Union. The cost of this clinical problem has been estimated at 1.75 million disability-adjusted life years lost, equating to 1.4% of the total healthcare burden in established market economies. Recent guidance from The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) states that research into the clinical and cost effectiveness of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a treatment for hip fracture is a priority. We asked the question: can a trial investigating THA for hip fracture currently be delivered in the NHS?. Methods. We performed a contemporaneous process evaluation that provides a context for the interpretation of the findings of WHiTE Two – a randomised study of THA for hip fracture. We developed a mixed methods approach to situate the trial centre within the context of wider United Kingdom clinical practice. We focused on fidelity, implementation, acceptability and feasibility of both the trial processes and interventions to stakeholder groups, such as healthcare providers and patients. Results. We have shown that patients are willing to participate in this type of research and that surgeons value being part of a team that has a strong research ethos. However, surgical practice does not currently reflect NICE guidance. Current models of service delivery for hip fractures are unlikely to be able to provide timely total hip arthroplasty for suitable patients. Conclusions. Further observational research should be conducted to define the population of interest before future interventional studies are performed. Cite this article: C. Huxley, J. Achten, M. L. Costa, F. Griffiths, X. L. Griffin. A process evaluation of the WHiTE Two trial comparing total hip arthroplasty with and without dual mobility component in the treatment of displaced intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur: Can a trial investigating total hip arthroplasty for hip fracture be delivered in the NHS? Bone Joint Res 2016;5:444–452. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.510.BJR-2015-0008.R1

Aims

The Exeter V40 femoral stem is the most implanted stem in the National Joint Registry (NJR) for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). In 2004, the 44/00/125 stem was released for use in ‘cement-in-cement’ revision cases. It has, however, been used ‘off-label’ as a primary stem when patient anatomy requires a smaller stem with a 44 mm offset. We aimed to investigate survival of this implant in comparison to others in the range when used in primary THAs recorded in the NJR.

Aims

Despite few good-quality studies on the subject, total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasingly being performed for displaced intracapsular fractures of the neck of femur. We compared outcomes of all patients with displacement of these fractures treated surgically over a ten-year period in one institution.

Aims

The rate of dislocation when traditional single bearing implants are used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been reported to be between 8% and 10%. The use of dual mobility bearings can reduce this risk to between 0.5% and 2%. Dual mobility bearings are more expensive, and it is not clear if the additional clinical benefits constitute value for money for the payers. We aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of dual mobility compared with single bearings for patients undergoing revision THA.

Objectives

The objective of this study was to assess all evidence comparing the Thompson monoblock hemiarthroplasty with modular unipolar implants for patients requiring hemiarthroplasty of the hip with respect to mortality and complications.

We aimed to determine whether cemented hemiarthroplasty is associated with a higher post-operative mortality and rate of re-operation when compared with uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Data on 19 669 patients, who were treated with a hemiarthroplasty following a fracture of the hip in a nine-year period from 2002 to 2011, were extracted from NHS Scotland’s acute admission database (Scottish Morbidity Record, SMR01). We investigated the rate of mortality at day 0, 1, 7, 30, 120 and one-year post-operatively using 12 case-mix variables to determine the independent effect of the method of fixation. At day 0, those with a cemented hemiarthroplasty had a higher rate of mortality (p < 0.001) compared with those with an uncemented hemiarthroplasty, equivalent to one extra death per 424 procedures. By day one this had become one extra death per 338 procedures. Increasing age and the five-year co-morbidity score were noted as independent risk factors. By day seven, the cumulative rate of mortality was less for cemented hemiarthroplasty though this did not reach significance until day 120. The rate of re-operation was significantly higher for uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Despite adjusting for 12 confounding variables, these only accounted for 15% of the observed variability.

The debate about the choice of the method of fixation for a hemiarthroplasty with respect to the rate of mortality or the risk of re-operation may be largely superfluous. Our results suggest that uncemented hemiarthroplasties may have a role to play in elderly patients with significant co-morbid disease.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1185–91.