Search

Background: Demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is increasing as it remains the gold-standard treatment for end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of the knee are not indicated for diagnosing knee OA and represent a possible delay to orthopaedic surgeon referral and unnecessary expenditure. The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients who underwent an MRI in the two years prior to their primary TKA for OA and determine patient and physician associations with increased MRI usage. Methods: This is a population-based cohort study using administrative data from Ontario, Canada. All patients over 40 years old who underwent their first primary TKA between April 1, 2008, and March 31, 2019, were included. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS and included the Cochran–Armitage test for trend of MRI prior to surgery. A predictive multivariable regression model was used to determine features correlated to receiving an MRI. Results: There were 194,989 eligible first-time TKA recipients, of which 38,244 (19.6%) received an MRI in the two years prior to their surgery. The majority of these (69.6%) were ordered by primary care physicians. Patients who received an MRI were younger, had fewer comorbidities and were more affluent than patients who did not (p < 0.001). MRI use prior to TKA increased from 2008 to 2018 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Despite MRIs rarely being indicated for the work-up of end-stage OA, nearly one in five patients have an MRI in the two years prior to their TKA. This may be increasing healthcare expenditure and surgical wait-times. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Surgery is the property of CMA Impact Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic had innumerable impacts on healthcare delivery. In Canada, this included limitations on inpatient capacity, which resulted in an increased focus on outpatient surgery for non-emergent cases such as joint replacements. The objective of this study was to assess whether the pandemic and the shift towards outpatient surgery had an impact on access to joint replacement for marginalized patients. Methods: Data from Ontario's administrative healthcare databases were obtained for all patients undergoing an elective hip or knee replacement between January 1, 2018 and August 31, 2021. All surgeries performed before March 15, 2020 were classified as "pre-COVID," while all procedures performed after that date were classified as "post-COVID." The Ontario Marginalization Index domains were used to analyze proportion of marginalized patients undergoing surgery pre- and post-COVID. Results: A total of 102,743 patients were included—42,812 hip replacements and 59,931 knee replacements. There was a significant shift towards outpatient surgery during the post-COVID period (1.1% of all cases pre-COVID to 13.2% post-COVID, p < 0.001). In the post-COVID cohort, there were significantly fewer patients from some marginalized groups, as well as fewer patients with certain co-morbidities, such as congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Conclusion: The most important finding of this population-level database study is that, compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a change in the profile of patients undergoing hip and knee replacements in Ontario, specifically across a range of indicators. Fewer marginalized patients are undergoing joint replacement surgery since the COVID-19 pandemic. Further monitoring of access to joint replacement surgery is required in order to ensure that surgery is provided to those who are most in need. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: At our centre, we developed and implemented a video-based post-operative physiotherapy program for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Our aims were to analyse and compare the outcomes of this program to in-person physiotherapy. Methods: We reviewed the outcomes of 112 patients and captured range-of-motion (ROM) measurements and pain scores (P4 questionnaire). We compared the outcomes to a cohort of 175 patients undergoing in-person therapy. Comparative analysis was performed using a two-tailed Student's t-test. Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, sex, or initial post-operative knee ROM. On discharge from virtual physiotherapy, mean flexion was 122.6° (SD 7.6). There was no significant difference in improvement in knee flexion between the virtual and in-person groups (mean 30.6° vs 34.0°, p = 0.07). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 120° of flexion (85.0% virtual vs 91.3% in-person, p = 0.11) or those achieving an extension deficit of ≤ 5° (96.0% vs 98.3%, p = 0.25). There was no difference in the number of PT visits to discharge (10.5 vs 11.1, p = 0.14) or final pain scores (12.4 vs 11.9, p = 0.61). Conclusion: Improvements in knee ROM measures are comparable between virtual and in-person physiotherapy with both groups achieving a good functional range. These findings have implications for the virtual delivery of healthcare, especially among remote populations and patients with mobility limitations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Income-based differences in the use of and outcomes in TKA have been studied; however, it is not known if different healthcare systems affect this relationship. Although Canada's single-payer healthcare system is assumed to attenuate the wealth-based differences in TKA use observed in the United States, empirical cross-border comparisons are lacking.Questions/purposes: (1) Does TKA use differ between Pennsylvania, USA, and Ontario, Canada? (2) Are income-based disparities in TKA use larger in Pennsylvania or Ontario? (3) Are TKA outcomes (90-day mortality, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision rates) different between Pennsylvania and Ontario? (4) Are income-based disparities in TKA outcomes larger in Pennsylvania or Ontario?Methods: We identified all patients hospitalized for primary TKA in this cross-border retrospective analysis, using administrative data for 2012 to 2018, and we found a total of 161,244 primary TKAs in Ontario and 208,016 TKAs in Pennsylvania. We used data from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council, Harrisburg, PA, USA, and the ICES (formally the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences), Toronto, Ontario, Canada. We linked patient-level data to the respective census data to determine community-level income using ZIP Code or postal code of residence and stratified patients into neighborhood income quintiles. We compared TKA use (age and gender, standardized per 10,000 population per year) for patients residing in the highest-income versus the lowest-income quintile neighborhoods. Similarly secondary outcomes 90-day mortality, 90-day readmission, and 1-year revision rates were compared between the two regions and analyzed by income groups.Results: TKA use was higher in Pennsylvania than in Ontario overall and for all income quintiles (lowest income quartile: 31 versus 18 procedures per 10,000 population per year; p < 0.001; highest income quartile: 38 versus 23 procedures per 10,000 population per year; p < 0.001). The relative difference in use between the highest-income and lowest-income quintile was larger in Ontario (28% higher) than in Pennsylvania (23% higher); p < 0.001. Patients receiving TKA in Pennsylvania were more likely to be readmitted within 90 days and were more likely to undergo revision within the first year than patients in Ontario, but there was no difference in mortality at 1 year. When comparing income groups, there were no differences between the countries in 90-day mortality, readmission, or 1-year revision rates (p > 0.05).Conclusion: These results suggest that universal health insurance through a single-payer may not reduce the income-based differences in TKA access that are known to exist in the United States. Future studies are needed determine if our results are consistent across other geographic regions and other surgical procedures.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studiesthathavebeenpublishedin The Lancethavereporteda survivorship of 82% for total knee arthroplasty and 77% for total hip arthroplasty (with older bearing surfaces) at 25 years 4-6. Fixation methods and tribology 12, including improved cementing techniques 13, biological fixation 14, or just an awareness of implantation technique and choice of implants, have greatly advanced for both hip and knee arthroplasty, resulting in better survivorship 15. Current Situation Hip and knee arthroplasty remain the fastest growing 1 and most successful 2 surgical procedures. Total hip arthroplasty has historically been named the "operation of the century", 3 with outcome scores that suggest that not only is function rapidlyrestored,butlongevityoftheprocedureischaracterized by a high percentage that continues into the third decade 4-6. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: To assess the relationship between patients' expectations for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and satisfaction with surgical outcome. Methods: This prospective cohort study recruited patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) ages ≥30 years who were referred for TKA at 2 hip/knee surgery centers in Alberta, Canada. Those who received primary, unilateral TKA completed questionnaires pre‐TKA to assess TKA expectations (17‐item Hospital for Special Surgery [HSS] TKA Expectations questionnaire) and contextual factors (age, sex, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score physical function short form [KOOS‐PS], 8‐item Patient Health Questionnaire depression scale, body mass index [BMI], comorbidities, and prior joint replacement), and 1‐year post‐TKA to assess overall satisfaction with TKA results. Using multivariate logistic regression, we examined the relationship between TKA expectations (HSS TKA outcomes considered to be very important) and postoperative satisfaction (very satisfied versus somewhat satisfied versus dissatisfied). Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. Results: At 1 year, 1,266 patients with TKA (92.1%) reported their TKA satisfaction (mean ± SD age 67.2 ± 8.8 years, 60.9% women, and mean BMI 32.6 kg/m2); 74.7% of patients were very satisfied, 17.1% were somewhat satisfied, and 8.2% were dissatisfied. Controlling for other factors, an expectation of TKA to improve patients' ability to kneel was associated with lower odds of satisfaction (adjusted OR 0.725 [95% CI 0.54–0.98]). An expectation of TKA to improve psychological well‐being was associated with lower odds of satisfaction for individuals in the lowest tertile of pre‐TKA KOOS‐PS scores (adjusted OR 0.49 [95% CI 0.28–0.84]), but higher odds for those in the highest tertile (adjusted OR 2.37 [95% CI 1.33–4.21]). Conclusion: In patients with TKA, preoperative expectations regarding kneeling and psychological well‐being were significantly associated with the level of TKA satisfaction at 1 year. Ensuring that patients' expectations are achievable may enhance appropriate provision of TKA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with a short length of hospital stay have been reported; however, most studies have not accounted for an inherent patient selection bias and discharge disposition. The purpose of this study was to utilize a propensity score to match and compare the outcomes of patients undergoing THA or TKA with short and longer lengths of stay with a discharge directly home.Methods: An administrative database from Ontario, Canada, which has a single-payer health-care system, was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who underwent THA or TKA from 2008 to 2016. Patients were subsequently stratified into 2 groups based on their length of stay: short length of stay (≤2 days; thereafter referred to as short stay) and longer length of stay (>2 days; thereafter referred to as longer stay). Using a propensity score, patients who underwent short-stay THA or TKA were matched to patients who underwent longer-stay THA or TKA. Matching was based on 15 demographic, medical, and surgical factors. Our primary outcomes included postoperative complications, health-care utilization (readmission and emergency department presentation), and health-care costs.Results: Overall, 89,656 TKAs (14,645 short stays and 75,011 longer stays) and 52,610 THAs (9,426 short stays and 43,184 longer stays) were included in this study. Patients who underwent short-stay THA or TKA were significantly more likely (p < 0.05) to be younger, male, healthier, and from a higher socioeconomic status and to have undergone the procedure with a higher-volume surgeon. Over 95% of short-stay cases were successfully matched to longer-stay cases, and we found no significant difference in complications, health-care utilization, and costs between patients on the basis of the length of stay.Conclusions: Patients undergoing short-stay THA or TKA with a discharge home were more likely to be younger, healthy, male patients from a higher socioeconomic status. Higher-volume surgeons are also more likely to perform short-stay THA or TKA. These characteristics confirm the previously held belief that a selection bias exists when comparing cohorts based on time to discharge. When comparing matched cohorts of patients who underwent short-stay and longer-stay THA or TKA, we observed no difference in outcomes, suggesting that a short stay with a discharge home in the appropriately selected patient is safe following THA or TKA.Level Of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) are common and effective surgical procedures. This study sought to compare utilization and short‐term outcomes of primary TKA and THA in adjacent regions of Canada and the United States. Methods: The study was designed as a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent primary TKA or THA, comparing administrative data from New York and Ontario in 2012–2013. Demographic features of the TKA and THA patients, per capita utilization rates, and short‐term outcomes were compared between the jurisdictions. Results: A higher percentage of New York hospitals performed TKA compared to Ontario hospitals (75.7% versus 42.1%; P < 0.001), and the mean annual procedural volume for TKAs was lower in New York hospitals (mean 179 versus 327 in Ontario hospitals; P < 0.001). After direct standardization, utilization was significantly lower in New York compared to Ontario, both for TKA (16.1 TKAs versus 21.4 TKAs per 10,000 population per year; P < 0.001) and for THA (10.5 THAs versus 11.5 THAs per 10,000 population per year; P < 0.001). For those who underwent TKA, the length of stay in Ontario hospitals was significantly longer (mean 3.7 days versus 3.4 days in New York hospitals; P < 0.001). A smaller percentage of New York patients were discharged directly home (46.2% versus 90.9% of Ontario patients; P < 0.001), but 30‐day and 90‐day readmission rates were higher in New York compared to Ontario (30‐day rates, 4.6% versus 3.9% [P < 0.001]; 90‐day rates, 8.4% versus 6.7% [P < 0.001]). For the THA cohorts, the results with regard to length of stay, discharge disposition, and readmission rates were similar to those for TKA. Conclusion: Ontario has higher utilization of total joint arthroplasty than New York but has a smaller percentage of hospitals performing these procedures. Patients are more likely to be discharged home and less likely to be readmitted in Ontario. Our results suggest areas where each jurisdiction could improve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Episode-of-care payments are defined as a single lump-sum payment for all services associated with a single medical event or surgery and are designed to incentivize efficiency and integration among providers and healthcare systems. A TKA is considered an exemplar for an episode-of-care payment model by many policymakers, but data describing variation payments between hospitals for TKA are extremely limited.Questions/purposes: We asked: (1) How much variation is there between hospitals in episode-of-care payments for primary TKA? (2) Is variation in payment explained by differences in hospital structural characteristics such as teaching status or geographic location, patient factors (age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities), and discharge disposition during the postoperative period (home versus skilled nursing facility)? (3) After accounting for those factors, what proportion of the observed variation remains unexplained?Methods: We used Medicare administrative data to identify fee-for-service beneficiaries who underwent a primary elective TKA in 2009. After excluding low-volume hospitals, we created longitudinal records for all patients undergoing TKAs in eligible hospitals encompassing virtually all payments by Medicare for a 120-day window around the TKA (30 days before to 90 days after). We examined payments for the preoperative, perioperative, and postdischarge periods based on the hospital where the TKA was performed. Confounding variables were controlled for using multivariate analyses to determine whether differences in hospital payments could be explained by differences in patient demographics, comorbidity, or hospital structural factors.Results: There was considerable variation in payments across hospitals. Median (interquartile range) hospital preoperative, perioperative, postdischarge, and 120-day payments for patients who did not experience a complication were USD 623 (USD 516-768), USD 13,119 (USD 12,165-14,668), USD 8020 (USD 6403-9933), and USD 21,870 (USD 19,736-25,041), respectively. Variation cannot be explained by differences in hospital structure. Median (interquartile range) episode payments were greater for hospitals in the Northeast (USD 26,291 [22,377-30,323]) compared with the Midwest, South, and West (USD 20,614, [USD 18,592-22.968]; USD 21,584, [USD 19,663-23,941]; USD 22,421, [USD 20,317-25,860]; p < 0.001) and for teaching compared with nonteaching hospitals (USD 23,152 [USD 20,426-27,127] versus USD 21,336 [USD 19,352-23,846]; p < 0.001). Patient characteristics explained approximately 15% of the variance in hospital payments, hospital characteristics (teaching status, geographic region) explained 30% of variance, and approximately 55% of variance was not explained by either factor.Conclusions: There is much unexplained variation in episode-of-care payments at the hospital-level, suggesting opportunities for enhanced efficiency. Further research is needed to ensure an appropriate balance between such efficiencies and access to care.Level Of Evidence: Level II, economic analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]