A sense of being rejected: Patients' lived experiences of cancelled knee or hip replacement surgery.

BACKGROUND: Growing care queues, reduced access to care and cancelled surgery are realities for some patients being treated with total hip or knee replacement surgery in Sweden. Most of the patients on the waiting lists have experienced pain and limited motion for a varying period of time, with a negative effect on their everyday lives. Overbooked surgical schedules are already contributing to the lengthy waiting times, but, with the addition of cancellations, longer waiting times will increase still further and may affect patients' well-being. METHODS: In the present study, we aimed to illuminate the experience of having planned surgery cancelled, based on narratives from 10 participants. The interview transcriptions were analysed using a phenomenological hermeneutic approach. RESULTS: The comprehensive analyses revealed that the participants described the agony of being deselected and the additional impression of being excluded. Metaphors of being damaged and feeling physical pain were used and the interpretations referred to the cancellations as unpleasant. Additionally, the important relationship and the trust between the health workers and the patient were negatively affected by the cancellation. CONCLUSION: After the cancellation, the participants expressed being vulnerable and from their perspective the cancelled surgery affected them deeply; in fact, much more than the healthcare workers appeared to understand. Therefore, information around the cancellation must be given respectfully and with dignity, in a dialogue between the patient and the healthcare workers. Taken together, to enable an opportunity to be involved in the continued care. The cancellations should be seen as an interruption, in which the patients' chance of living a pain-free, active life is postponed.

Delayed and cancelled orthopaedic surgery; are there solutions to reduce the complex set of problems? A systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Unexpected cancellations of, and delays to, orthopaedic surgery have adverse effects, with a negative impact on hospital performance and undesirable patient outcomes. As cancellations and delays are common, finding measures to prevent them is a matter of urgency. METHODS: The present systematic review conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook. Peer-reviewed studies reporting on cancellations or delays in patients requiring emergency orthopaedic or planned orthopaedic surgery that compared care action/intervention with no action or traditional care were included. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation used to assess the quality of evidence of the results from the included studies. The objective of the present study was systematically to search and review the literature for qualitative evidence of factors that might reduce cancellations of and delays to orthopaedic surgical procedures. RESULTS: The electronic search yielded 1209 studies and eight articles were included in the performed quality assessment. The heterogeneity of the studies and the lack of calculations and statistics in the studies resulted in no meta-analysis. The result of the quality assessment indicated that the evidence ranked from low to very low across the different outcomes. The main limiting factor, which was the reason for a decrease in quality in some outcomes, was the study designs, which were non-randomised control or retrospective approach. The interventions in the included studies could help to support a reduction in the risk of cancelled and delayed orthopaedic procedures. CONCLUSION: This systematic literature review has revealed important evidence to help reduce the risk of cancelled and delayed orthopaedic procedures associated with a variety of care action exposures. They include a fast-track pathway, pre-operative guidelines and telephone contact with patients prior to surgery, as well as careful consideration of additional pre-operative tests.

Economic evaluation of a person-centred care intervention in head and neck oncology: results from a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Head and neck cancer and its treatment deteriorate quality of life, but symptoms improve with person-centred care. We examined the cost-effectiveness of a person-centred care intervention versus standard medical care. METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial of a person-centred intervention, patients were planned for outpatient oncology treatment in a Swedish university hospital between 2012 and 2014 and were followed during 1 year. Annual healthcare costs were identified from medical records and administrative register data. Productivity costs were calculated from reported sick leave. Health-related quality of life was collected using the EuroQol Group's five-dimension health state questionnaire. RESULTS: Characteristics were similar between 53 patients in the intervention group and 39 control patients. The average total cost was Euro (EUR) 55,544 (95% confidence interval: EUR 48,474-62,614) in the intervention group and EUR 57,443 (EUR 48,607-66,279) among controls, with similar health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: This person-centred intervention did not result in increased costs and dominated the standard medical care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number: NCT02982746).

Cost-effectiveness analysis of surgical versus non-surgical management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.

PURPOSE: An Achilles tendon rupture is a common injury that typically affects people in the middle of their working lives. The injury has a negative impact in terms of both morbidity for the individual and the risk of substantial sick leave. The aim of this study was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of surgical compared with non-surgical management in patients with an acute Achilles tendon rupture. METHODS: One hundred patients (86 men, 14 women; mean age, 40 years) with an acute Achilles tendon rupture were randomised (1:1) to either surgical treatment or non-surgical treatment, both with an accelerated rehabilitation protocol (surgical n = 49, non-surgical n = 51). One of the surgical patients was excluded due to a partial re-rupture and five surgical patients were lost to the 1-year economic follow-up. One patient was excluded due to incorrect inclusion and one was lost to the 1-year follow-up in the non-surgical group. The cost was divided into direct and indirect costs. The direct cost is the actual cost of health care, whereas the indirect cost is the production loss related to the impact of the patient's injury in terms of lost ability to work. The health benefits were assessed using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Sampling uncertainty was assessed by means of non-parametric boot-strapping. RESULTS: Pre-injury, the groups were comparable in terms of demographic data and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The mean cost of surgical management was €7332 compared with €6008 for non-surgical management (p = 0.024). The mean number of QALYs during the 1-year time period was 0.89 and 0.86 in the surgical and non-surgical groups respectively. The (incremental) cost-effectiveness ratio was €45,855. Based on bootstrapping, the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve shows that the surgical treatment is 57% likely to be cost-effective at a threshold value of €50,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment was more expensive compared with non-surgical management. The cost-effectiveness results give a weak support (57% likelihood) for the surgical treatment to be cost-effective at a willingness to pay per QALY threshold of €50,000. This is support for surgical treatment; however, additionally cost-effectiveness studies alongside RCTs are important to clarify which treatment option is preferred from a cost-effectiveness perspective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Cost description of clinical examination and MRI in wrist ligament injuries.

OBJECTIVE: The total number and cost of wrist MRIs in the catchment area of the Västra Götaland Region in Sweden (population 1 723 000) during 1 year was analysed, together with the number and content of referrals. METHODS: Six radiology departments reported the numbers and rate of all MRI investigations intended to diagnose wrist ligament injuries (n = 411) and other injuries to the wrist. RESULTS: The additional cost of the difference between MRIs and a clinical examination by a hand surgeon, plus indirect costs for patients with suspected wrist ligament injuries, was calculated as 957 000 euros. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that MRI should only be used in patients in whom there are clinical difficulties in terms of diagnosing wrist ligament injuries. It is suggested that patients with suspected wrist ligament injuries should be referred directly to an experienced hand surgeon, capable of performing a standardised wrist examination and, when needed, diagnostic arthroscopy and final treatment. The proposed algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of suspected wrist ligament injuries presented in the present study could save time for the patient and for the radiology departments, as well as reducing costs. The ability to implement the early and appropriate treatment of acute ligament injuries could be improved at the same time.

The unannounced patient in the corridor: trust, friction and person-centered care.

In this study, a Swedish cancer clinic was studied where three to four unscheduled patients sought support from the hospital on a daily basis for pain and nutrition problems. The clinic was neither staffed nor had a budget to handle such return visits. In order to offer the patients a better service and decrease the workload of the staff in addition to their everyday activities, a multidisciplinary team was established to address the unscheduled return visits. The team was supposed to involve the patient, build trust, decrease the friction, and contribute to a successful rehabilitation process. Data were collected from the patients and the staff. Patients who encountered the team (intervention) and patients who encountered the regular ad hoc type of organization (control) answered a questionnaire measuring trust and friction. Nurses in the control group spent 35% of their full-time employment, and the intervention group staffed with nurses spent 30% of their full-time employment in addressing the needs of these return patients. The patients perceived that trust between them and the staff was high. In summary, it was measured as being 4.48 [standard deviation (SD) = 0.82] in the intervention group and 4.41 (SD = 0.79) in the control group using the 5-point Likert scale. The data indicate that using a multidisciplinary team is a promising way to handle the problems of unannounced visits from patients. Having a team made it cost effective for the clinic and provided a better service than the traditional ad hoc organization. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Incidence and root causes of cancellations for elective orthopaedic procedures: a single center experience of 17,625 consecutive cases.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the Swedish public health-care system is to provide care on equal terms for all citizens. In this, as in most other systems where taxes and/or insurances pay for most of the care, normal market forces are set aside at least in part. At times, this has, for example, resulted in long waiting lists, particularly in terms of elective orthopaedic surgery, with several negative consequences, such as cancellations of planned surgery. METHODS: The main purpose of this retrospective observational single center study was to evaluate and describe the number and reasons for cancellations in elective orthopaedic surgery. Studied were all the elective patients scheduled for joint replacement, arthroscopy and foot & ankle surgery, January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2011, whose procedure was cancelled at least once. RESULTS: Of all 17,625 patients scheduled for elective surgery 6,911 (39%) received at least one, some several cancellations. The most common reason for cancelling a planned surgery was different patient-related factors 3,293 (33%). Cancellations due to treatment guarantee legislation reached 2,885 (29%) and 1,181 (12%) of the cancellations were related to incomplete pre-operative preparation of the patients. Organisational reasons were the cause of approximately 869 (9%) of the cancellations. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients waiting for elective orthopaedic surgery 6,911(39%) had their surgical procedure cancelled at least once, some several times. It appears that it should be possible to eliminate many of these cancellations, while others are unavoidable or caused by factors outside the responsibility of the individual clinic or even hospital. One possible way of influencing the high rate of cancellations might be to change the view of the patients and involve them in the overall planning of the care process.