Trends in Australian inguinal hernia repair rates: a 15-year population study.

BACKGROUND: An inguinal hernia is one of the most common surgical pathologies, and therefore the repair of an inguinal hernia is one of the most common general surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to assess the trend in inguinal hernia repair (IHR) rates in Australia between 2000/2001 and 2014/2015 using population data from public and private hospitals. METHODS: ICD-10 data cubes from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare were analysed to determine the number of inguinal hernia repairs performed, open or laparoscopically, between 2000/2001 and 2014/2015 financial years. These data were combined with the Australian Bureau of Statistics population data estimates for the corresponding years, to give a procedure per 100 000 estimates. RESULTS: Incidence of IHRs within Australia decreased from 217 to 194 per 100 000 population over the 15-year study period. There was a clear shift towards increased uptake of laparoscopic surgery with a subsequent fall in rates of open IHRs. Males accounted for the majority of IHR procedures. Unilateral repair was more common; however, the incidence of unilateral repair rates decreased while bilateral IHR rates increased over the study period. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic techniques are increasingly being used within public and private institutions across the country for inguinal hernia repair. There has also been a decrease in the incidence of IHR procedures performed per year over the 15-year period studied, consistent with published literature from Europe and the USA.

Inpatient rehabilitation did not positively affect 6-month patient-reported outcomes after hip or knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes 6 months after hip or knee arthroplasty in subjects who were discharged to home compared to those who attended inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: Seven hundred and forty-eight consecutive total hip or knee replacement patients were identified from a prospective database. Preoperative and 6-month post-operative patient-reported outcome measures were recorded. Forty-four patients discharged directly to home were cohort matched by age, gender, procedure and surgeon to 44 patients from the cohort who received inpatient care. Patient outcomes were compared using SPSS version 24 software. RESULTS: Both cohorts saw significant improvements from baseline at 6 months. Median length of rehabilitation for the inpatient group was 7 days (4-16 days). There was no significant difference between the groups based on patient-reported outcomes. There was a clinically significant difference (P = 0.047) in the body mass index of the Home Group (mean = 27) to Rehab Group (mean = 29). CONCLUSION: Our study has shown that inpatient rehabilitation after hip or knee arthroplasty did not positively affect 6-month patient-reported satisfaction, expectation, pain, quality of life, activities of daily living scores, when compared with subjects who were discharged direct to home. A significant average saving of $5600 per patient with the use of home discharge is a promising avenue for health cost reduction, and health resource distribution.