Outcomes and motives for not proceeding with the second stage bilateral knee replacement: a comparison of cancelled and completed bilateral total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common treatment option for patients with bilateral symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, yet some patients do not proceed with their second procedure. Our study aimed to identify the rate and reasons why patients did not proceed with their second procedure and compare their functional outcomes, satisfaction and complication rates with those of patients who had completed a staged bilateral TKA. METHODS: We determined the proportion of patients who underwent TKA but did not proceed with planned surgery for the second knee within 2 years, and compared their satisfaction with surgery, improvement in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and complications between groups. RESULTS: Our study included 268 patients: 220 patients who underwent staged bilateral TKA and 48 patients who cancelled their second procedure. The most common reason for not proceeding with the second procedure was a slow recovery after the first TKA (43.2%), followed by functional improvement in symptoms in the unoperated knee negating the need for surgery (27.3%), poor experience with the first surgery (22.7%), treatment of other comorbidities necessitating cancellation of their second procedure (4.6%) and employment reasons (2.3%). Patients who cancelled their second procedure were noted to have a worse postoperative OKS improvement (p < 0.001) and lower satisfaction rate (p < 0.001), than patients who underwent staged bilateral TKA. CONCLUSION: About one-fifth of patients scheduled for staged bilateral TKA declined to proceed with the second knee surgery within 2 years showing a substantially decreased functional outcome and satisfaction rate. However, more than one-quarter (27.3%) of patients noted improvements in their contralateral (unoperated) knee, such that a second surgery was no longer felt to be necessary.

Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): thresholds for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip and knee scores for patients with total hip and knee replacement.

PURPOSE: To define patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip (OHS) and knee (OKS) scores 6 and 12 months after total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement. To compare PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L scored using: (1) the Canadian value set, (2) the crosswalk value set, and (3) the equal weighted Level Sum Score (LSS). METHODS: We mailed questionnaires to consecutive patients following surgeon referral for primary THR or TKR and at 6 and 12 months post-surgery. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the EQ-5D-5L, the OHS, and OKS. We assessed PASS cut-off values for PROMs using percentile and ROC methods, with the Youden Index. RESULTS: Five hundred forty-two surgical patients (mean age, 64 years, 57% female, 49% THR) completed baseline and 12-month questionnaires. 89% of THR and 81% of TKR patients rated PASS as acceptable at 12 months. PASS cut-off values for THR for the EQ-5D-5L (Canadian) were 0.85 (percentile) and 0.84 (Youden) at 12 months. Cut-off values were similar for the LSS (0.85 and 0.85) and lower for the crosswalk value set (0.74 and 0.73), respectively. EQ-5D-5L cut-off values for TKR were Canadian, 0.77 (Percentile) and 0.78 (Youden), LSS, 0.75 and 0.80, and crosswalk, 0.67 and 0.74, respectively. Cut-off values 6 and 12 months post-surgery ranged from 38 to 39 for the OHS, and 28 to 36 for the OKS (range 0 worst to 48 best). CONCLUSION: PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford scores varied, not only between methods and timing of assessment, but also by different EQ-5D-5L value sets, which vary between countries. Because of this variation, PASS cut-off values are not necessarily generalizable to other populations of TJR patients. We advise caution in interpreting PROMs when using EQ-5D-5L PASS cut-off values developed in different countries. A standardization of methods is needed before published cut-off values can be used with confidence in other populations.

Patient expectations and satisfaction 6 and 12 months following total hip and knee replacement.

PURPOSE: To assess (1) patient expectations before total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement; (2) which expectations are met and unmet 6 and 12 months post-surgery; (3) the role of unmet expectations in satisfaction. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to consecutive patients following surgeon referral for primary THR or TKR. Patients listed their own expectations and also completed the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Expectation Survey. We used content analysis to group expectations into themes. At 6 and 12 months post-surgery, patients were given a copy of their own list of individual expectations and reassessed each one as met or unmet. We also assessed fulfilled HSS expectations and satisfaction with surgery. RESULTS: The sample of 556 patients (49% THR, 57% female) had a mean age of 64 years (SD10). The five most frequent expectation themes were pain relief, mobility, walking, physical activities, and daily activities. Of these, physical activities had the lowest percentage met 12 months post-surgery. 95% (THR) and 87% (TKR) were satisfied/very satisfied with their surgery 12 months post-surgery. Very satisfied patients had a significantly greater percentage of met expectations (96% THR; 92% TKR) than dissatisfied patients (42% THR; 12% TKR). Although most expectations listed by patients were included in the HSS surveys, some were not, particularly for TKR. From 6 to 12 months, there was a significant increase in patient satisfaction for self-care, daily activities, and met expectations for THR and pain relief, self-care, daily activities, and recreational activities for TKR. CONCLUSIONS: Expectations should be explicitly addressed before surgery, including a discussion of realistic expectations, particularly for physical activities.

Improving the quality of care with a single-entry model of referral for total joint replacement: a preimplementation/postimplementation evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed: (1) waiting time variation among surgeons; (2) proportion of patients receiving surgery within benchmark and (3) influence of the Winnipeg Central Intake Service (WCIS) across five dimensions of quality: accessibility, acceptability, appropriateness, effectiveness, safety. DESIGN: Preimplementation/postimplementation cross-sectional design comparing historical (n=2282) and prospective (n=2397) cohorts. SETTING: Regional, provincial health authority. PARTICIPANTS: Patients awaiting total joint replacement of the hip or knee. INTERVENTIONS: The WCIS is a single-entry model (SEM) to improve access to total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) surgery, implemented to minimise variation in total waiting time (TW) across orthopaedic surgeons and increase the proportion of surgeries within 26 weeks (benchmark). Impact of SEMs on quality of care is poorly understood. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes related to 'accessibility': waiting time variation across surgeons, waiting times (Waiting Time 2 (WT2)=decision to treat until surgery and TW=total waiting time) and surgeries within benchmark. Analysis included descriptive statistics, group comparisons and clustered regression. RESULTS: Variability in TW among surgeons was reduced by 3.7 (hip) and 4.3 (knee) weeks. Mean waiting was reduced for TKR (WT2/TW); TKR within benchmark increased by 5.9%. Accessibility and safety were the only quality dimensions that changed (post-WCIS THR and TKR). Shorter WT2 was associated with post-WCIS (knee), worse Oxford score (hip and knee) and having medical comorbidities (hip). Meeting benchmark was associated with post-WCIS (knee), lower Body Mass Index (BMI) (hip) and worse Oxford score (hip and knee). CONCLUSIONS: The WCIS reduced variability across surgeon waiting times, with modest reductions in overall waits for surgery. There was improvement in some, but not all, dimensions of quality.

Trends in revision hip and knee arthroplasty observations after implementation of a regional joint replacement registry.

BACKGROUND: National joint replacement registries outside North America have been effective in reducing revision risk. However, there is little information on the role of smaller regional registries similar to those found in Canada or the United States. We sought to understand trends in total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty revision patterns after implementation of a regional registry. METHODS: We reviewed our regional joint replacement registry containing all 30 252 cases of primary and revision THA and TKA performed between Jan. 1, 2005, and Dec. 31, 2013. Each revision case was stratified into early (< 2 yr), mid (2-10 yr) or late (> 10 yr), and we determined the primary reason for revision. RESULTS: The early revision rate for TKA dropped from 3.0% in 2005 to 1.3% in 2011 (R(2) = 0.84, p = 0.003). Similarly, the early revision rate for THA dropped from 4.2% to 2.1% (R(2) = 0.78, p = 0.008). Despite primary TKA and THA volumes increasing by 35.5% and 39.5%, respectively, there was no concomitant rise in revision volumes. The leading reasons for TKA revision were infection, instability, aseptic loosening and stiffness. The leading reasons for THA revision were infection, instability, aseptic loosening and periprosthetic fracture. There were no discernible trends over time in reasons for early, mid-term or late revision for either TKA or THA. CONCLUSION: After implementation of a regional joint replacement registry we observed a significant reduction in early revision rates. Further work investigating the mechanism by which registry reporting reduces early revision risk is warranted.

CONTEXTE: Ailleurs qu'en Amérique du Nord, les registres nationaux des remplacements articulaires ont été efficaces pour réduire le risque de révision. Cependant, il y a peu d'information sur le rôle des plus petits registres régionaux comme ceux qu'on trouve au Canada et aux États-Unis. Nous avons donc cherché à comprendre les tendances en matière de révision des arthroplasties totales de la hanche (ATH) et du genou (ATG) après la création d'un registre régional. MÉTHODES: Nous avons passé en revue notre registre régional des remplacements articulaires, qui contient les 30 252 ATH et ATG primaires et de révision effectuées entre le 1er janvier 2005 et le 31 décembre 2013. Chaque cas de révision a été classé précoce (< 2 ans), moyen (de 2 à 10 ans) ou tardif (> 10 ans), et nous avons déterminé la raison principale de la révision. RÉSULTATS: Le taux de révision précoce pour l'ATG a diminué de 3,0 % en 2005 à 1,3 % en 2011 (R2 = 0,84, p = 0,003). De même, le taux de révision précoce pour l'ATH a diminué de 4,2 % à 2,1 % (R2 = 0,78, p = 0,008). Malgré une augmentation des nombres d'ATG et d'ATH primaires de 35,5 % et de 39,5 %, respectivement, il n'y a pas eu de hausse concomitante du nombre de révisions. Les principaux motifs de révision de l'ATG étaient l'infection, l'instabilité, le descellement aseptique et la raideur. Les principaux motifs de révision de l'ATH étaient l'infection, l'instabilité, le descellement aseptique et les fractures périprothétiques. Aucune tendance n'a été décelée au fil du temps dans les motifs de révision précoce, moyenne et tardive pour l'une ou l'autre des interventions. CONCLUSION: Nous avons observé une baisse significative des taux de révision précoce après la mise en œuvre d'un registre régional des remplacements articulaires. Il serait pertinent d'étudier plus en profondeur le mécanisme par lequel le signalement dans un registre réduit le risque de révision précoce.

Reduced time to surgery improves mortality and length of stay following hip fracture: results from an intervention study in a Canadian health authority.

BACKGROUND: Existing literature demonstrating the negative impact of delayed hip fracture surgery on mortality consists largely of observational studies prone to selection bias and may overestimate the negative effects of delay. We conducted an intervention study to assess initiatives aimed at meeting a 48-hour benchmark for hip fracture surgery to determine if the intervention achieved a reduction in time to surgery, and if a general reduction in time to surgery improved mortality and length of stay. METHODS: We compared time to surgery, length of stay and mortality between pre- and postintervention patients with a hip fracture using the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazards model adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, type of surgery and year. RESULTS: We included 3525 pre- and 3007 postintervention patients aged 50 years or older. The proportion of patients receiving surgery within the benchmark increased from 66.8% to 84.6%, median length of stay decreased from 13.5 to 9.7 days, and crude in-hospital mortality decreased from 9.6% to 6.8% (all p < 0.001). Adjusted analyses revealed reduced mortality in hospital (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.81) and at 1 year (HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.79-0.96). Independent of the intervention period, having surgery within 48 hours demonstrated decreased adjusted risk of death in hospital (HR 0.51, 95%CI 0.41-0.63) and at 1 year postsurgery (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.80). CONCLUSION: Coordinated, region-wide efforts to improve timeliness of hip fracture surgery can successfully reduce time to surgery and appears to reduce length of stay and adjusted mortality in hospital and at 1 year.

CONTEXTE: La littérature actuelle qui démontre l'impact négatif d'un report de la chirurgie pour fracture de la hanche sur la mortalité repose en bonne partie sur des études d'observation sujettes à des biais de sélection et pourrait surestimer cet impact négatif. Nous avons réalisé une étude interventionnelle pour évaluer des mesures visant à faire respecter un délai maximum de 48 heures avant l'intervention pour fracture de la hanche afin de voir si elles avaient effectivement raccourci le délai avant la chirurgie et si l'abrègement général du délai avant la chirurgie avait réduit la mortalité et la durée du séjour hospitalier. MÉTHODES: Nous avons comparé le délai avant la chirurgie, la durée du séjour hospitalier et la mortalité des patients victimes d'une fracture de la hanche avant et après l'imposition des mesures, à l'aide d'un estimateur de Kaplan­Meier et d'un modèle de risques proportionnels de Cox, en tenant compte de l'âge, du sexe, des comorbidités, du type de chirurgie et de l'année. RÉSULTATS: Nous avons recruté respectivement 3525 et 3007 patients de 50 ans ou plus, avant et après l'imposition des mesures. La proportion de patients qui ont été opérés à l'intérieur du délai préconisé a augmenté de 66,8 % à 84,6 %, la durée médiane du séjour hospitalier a diminué de 13,5 à 9,7 jours et le taux brut de mortalité perhospitalière a diminué de 9,6 % à 6,8 % (tous, p < 0,001). Les analyses ajustées ont révélé une réduction de la mortalité perhospitalière (risque relatif [RR] 0,68, intervalle de confiance [IC] de 95 % 0,57­0,81) et à 1 an (RR 0,87, IC de 95 % 0,79­0,96). Indépendamment de la période (avant ou après l'imposition des mesures), le fait d'être opéré dans les 48 heures s'est accompagné d'une diminution du risque ajusté de mortalité en cours d'hospitalisation (RR = 0,51, IC de 95 % 0,41­0,63) et dans l'année suivant la chirurgie (RR 0,72, IC de 95 % 0,64­0,80). CONCLUSION: Des efforts coordonnés à l'échelle des régions visant à accélérer l'accès à la chirurgie pour fracture de la hanche peuvent réduire avec succès le délai avant la chirurgie et abréger le séjour hospitalier, en plus de diminuer la mortalité ajustée en cours d'hospitalisation et après 1 an.

Perspectives of Canadian Stakeholders on Criteria for Appropriateness for Total Joint Arthroplasty in Patients With Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: As rates of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) for osteoarthritis (OA) rise, there is a need to ensure appropriate use. We undertook this study to develop criteria for appropriate use of TJA. METHODS: In prior work, we used qualitative methods to separately assess OA patients' and arthroplasty surgeons' perceptions regarding appropriateness of patient candidates for TJA. The current study reviewed the appropriateness themes that emerged from each group, and a series of statements were developed to reflect each unique theme or criterion. A group of arthroplasty surgeons then indicated their level of agreement with each statement using electronic voting. Where ≤70% agreed or disagreed, the criterion was discussed and revised, and revoting occurred. In standardized telephone interviews, OA patient focus group participants indicated their level of agreement with each revised criterion. RESULTS: Qualitative research in 58 OA patients and 14 arthroplasty surgeons identified 11 appropriateness criteria. Member-checking in 15 surgeons (including 5 who had participated in the qualitative study) resulted in agreement on 6 revised criteria. These included evidence of arthritis on joint examination, patient-reported symptoms negatively impacting quality of life, an adequate trial of appropriate nonsurgical treatment, realistic patient expectations of surgery, mental and physical readiness of patient for surgery, and patient-surgeon agreement that potential benefits exceed risks. Thirty-six of the original 58 OA patient focus group participants (62.1%) participated in the member-check interviews and endorsed all 6 criteria. CONCLUSION: Patients and surgeons jointly endorsed 6 criteria for assessment of TJA appropriateness in OA patients. Prospective validation of these criteria (assessed preoperatively) as predictive of postoperative patient-reported outcomes is under way and will inform development of a surgeon-patient decision-support tool for assessment of TJA appropriateness.

Reliability and validity of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L in patients with osteoarthritis referred for hip and knee replacement.

PURPOSE: To assess the test-retest reliability of the EQ-5D-5L (5L) and compare the validity of the 5L and EQ-5D-3L (3L) in osteoarthritis patients referred to an orthopaedic surgeon for total joint replacement. METHODS: We mailed questionnaires to 306 consecutive patients following referral and a second questionnaire after 2 weeks to assess reliability. Questionnaires included the 5L, EQ-VAS, Short Form-12, Oxford hip and knee scores, pain VAS, and the 3L. We compared the ceiling effect, redistribution properties, convergent and discriminant validity, and discriminatory power of the 5L and 3L. RESULTS: We obtained 176 respondents (response rate 58 %), 60 % female, 64 % knee patients, mean age 65 years (SD 11), with no significant differences between responders versus non-responders. Intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.61-0.77 for the 5L dimensions and 0.87 for the 5L index. For the 3L, most patients used level 2 (some/moderate problems) for mobility (87 %), usual activities (78 %), and pain/discomfort (71 %). In comparison, 5L responses were spread out with only 52, 42, and 50 %, respectively, using the middle level. All convergent validity coefficients were stronger with the 5L (Spearman coefficients 0.51-0.75). Absolute informativity (Shannon's index) showed higher results for all dimensions of the 5L compared with the 3L (average difference 0.74). Relative informativity (Shannon's evenness index) showed an increase from the 3L to the 5L in mobility, usual activities, and pain/discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: The 5L provided stronger validity evidence than the 3L, especially for dimensions relevant to this patient population-mobility, usual activities, and pain/discomfort.

Patient factors in referral choice for total joint replacement surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although the option of next available surgeon can be found on surgeon referral forms for total joint replacement surgery, its selection varies across surgical practices. OBJECTIVES: Objectives are to assess the determinants of (a) a patient's request for a particular surgeon; and (b) the actual referral to a specific versus the next available surgeon. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to 306 consecutive patients referred to orthopedic surgeons. We assessed quality of life (Oxford Hip and Knee scores, Short Form-12, EuroQol 5D, Pain Visual Analogue Scale), referral experience, and the importance of surgeon choice, surgeon reputation, and wait time. We used logistic regression to build models for the 2 objectives. RESULTS: We obtained 176 respondents (response rate, 58%), 60% female, 65% knee patients, mean age of 65 years, with no significant differences between responders versus nonresponders. Forty-three percent requested a particular surgeon. Seventy-one percent were referred to a specific surgeon. Patients who rated surgeon choice as very/extremely important [adjusted odds ratio (OR), 6.54; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.57-16.64] and with household incomes of $90,000+ versus <$30,000 (OR, 5.74; 95% CI, 1.56-21.03) were more likely to request a particular surgeon. Hip patients (OR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.18-7.78), better Physical Component Summary-12 (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.02-1.63), and patients who rated surgeon choice as very/extremely important (OR, 3.88; 95% CI, 1.56-9.70) were more likely to be referred to a specific surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients want some choice in the referral decision. Providing sufficient information is important, so that patients are aware of their choices and can make an informed choice. Some patients prefer a particular surgeon despite longer wait times.

Spacelabs Innovative Project Award winner--2008. Megacode simulation workshop and education video--a megatonne of care and Code blue: live and interactive.

Skill acquisition and knowledge translation of best practices can be successfully facilitated using simulation methods. The 2008 Spacelabs Innovative Project Award was awarded for a unique training workshop that used simulation in the area of cardiac life support and resuscitation to train multiple health care personnel in basic and advanced skills. The megacode simulation workshop and education video was an educational event held in 2007 in Winnipeg, MB, for close to 60 participants and trainers from multiple disciplines across the provinces of Manitoba and Northwestern Ontario. The event included lectures, live simulation of a megacode, and hands-on training in the latest techniques in resuscitation. The goals of this project were to promote efficiency and better outcomes related to resuscitation measures, to foster teamwork, to emphasize the importance of each team member's role, and to improve knowledge and skills in resuscitation. The workshop was filmed to produce a training DVD that could be used for future knowledge enhancement and introductory training of health care personnel. Substantial positive feedback was received and evaluations indicated that participants reported improvement and expansion of their knowledge of advanced cardiac life support. Given their regular participation in cardiac arrest codes and the importance of staying up-to-date on best practice, the workshop was particularly useful to health care staff and nurses working in critical care areas. In addition, those who participate less frequently in cardiac resuscitation will benefit from the educational video for ongoing competency. Through accelerating knowledge translation from the literature to the bedside, it is hoped that this event contributed to improved patient care and outcomes with respect to advanced cardiac life support.