Search

Lindsay K Smith,1 Emma Dures,2 AD Beswick31Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Weston Area Health NHS Trust, Weston-super-Mare, North Somerset, UK; 2Centre for Health and Clinical Research, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK; 3Musculoskeletal Research Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, UKObjectives: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is highly successful but national registries indicate that average age has lowered and that younger patients are at higher risk of revision. Long-term follow-up of THA was historically recommended to identify aseptically failing THA, minimising the risks associated with extensive changes, but follow-up services are now in decline. A systematic review was conducted to search for evidence of the clinical or cost-effectiveness of hip arthroplasty surveillance.Methods: The study was registered with PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews and conducted according to PRISMA guidelines; databases included MEDLINE and Embase, and all studies were quality assessed. Original studies (2005 to 2017) reporting follow-up of adults with THA in situ >5 years were included. Researchers extracted quantitative and qualitative data from each study.Results: For eligibility, 4,137 studies were screened: 114 studies were included in the final analysis, representing 22 countries worldwide. Data extracted included study endpoint, patient detail, loss to follow-up, revisions, scores and radiographic analysis. Six themes were derived from inductive content analysis of text: support for long-term follow-up, subgroups requiring follow-up, effect of materials/techniques on THA survival, effect of design, indicators for revision, review process. Main findings—follow-up was specifically recommended to monitor change (eg asymptomatic loosening), when outcomes of joint construct are unknown, and for specific patient subgroups. Outcome scores alone are not enough, and radiographic review should be included.Conclusion: There were no studies directly evaluating the clinical effectiveness of the long-term follow-up of THA but expert opinions from a range of international authors advocated its use for defined subgroups to provide patient-centred care. In the absence of higher level evidence, these opinions, in conjunction with emerging outputs from the national joint registries, should be used to inform services for long-term follow-up of THA.Keywords: hip joint, replacement, surveillance, revision, long-term, continuing

Background: In old age, reduction in physical function leads to loss of independence, the need for hospital and long-term nursing-home care, and premature death. We did a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of community-based complex interventions in preservation of physical function and independence in elderly people.Methods: We searched systematically for randomised controlled trials assessing community-based multifactorial interventions in elderly people (mean age at least 65 years) living at home with at least 6 months of follow-up. Outcomes studied were living at home, death, nursing-home and hospital admissions, falls, and physical function. We did a meta-analysis of the extracted data.Findings: We identified 89 trials including 97 984 people. Interventions reduced the risk of not living at home (relative risk [RR] 0.95, 95% CI 0.93-0.97). Interventions reduced nursing-home admissions (0.87, 0.83-0.90), but not death (1.00, 0.97-1.02). Risk of hospital admissions (0.94, 0.91-0.97) and falls (0.90, 0.86-0.95) were reduced, and physical function (standardised mean difference -0.08, -0.11 to -0.06) was better in the intervention groups than in other groups. Benefit for any specific type or intensity of intervention was not noted. In populations with increased death rates, interventions were associated with reduced nursing-home admission. Benefit in trials was particularly evident in studies started before 1993.Interpretation: Complex interventions can help elderly people to live safely and independently, and could be tailored to meet individuals' needs and preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Improving uptake and adherence in cardiac rehabilitation: literature reviewAims. This paper presents a comprehensive systematic review of literature carried out to identify studies of interventions to improve uptake, adherence and professional compliance in cardiac rehabilitation. Background. Guidelines recommend that cardiac rehabilitation should be offered to patients following acute myocardial infarction and revascularization. Uptake and adherence are low, particularly in women, older people, and socially deprived and ethnic minority patients. Although patient, service and professional barriers to rehabilitation uptake have been described, no attempt has been made to evaluate systematically interventions aimed at improving uptake and adherence in cardiac rehabilitation. Methods. A comprehensive search strategy identified studies of cardiac rehabilitation, using the terms uptake, adherence and compliance. The search included grey literature, hand searching of specialist journals and conference abstracts. No language restriction was applied. Studies were summarized in three qualitative overviews and assessed by quality of evidence. Results. From 3261 publications identified, 957 were acquired on the basis of title or abstract. Few studies were of sufficient quality to make specific recommendations. Six, 12 and five studies, respectively, provided adequate information on methods to improve uptake, adherence or professional compliance. A minority of studies were randomized controlled trials. Studies of motivational and self-management strategies and use of lay volunteers showed some promise in improving rehabilitation uptake or lifestyle change. Nurse-led coordination of care after hospital discharge may have a role in improving rehabilitation uptake. Limited information was provided on resource implications, and there was a lack of studies with under-represented groups. The literature contained numerous suggested interventions which merit evaluation in appropriately designed studies. Conclusions. Little research has been reported evaluating interventions to improve uptake, adherence and professional compliance in cardiac rehabilitation. A wide range of possible interventions was identified and further evaluations of methods are indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Low English language literacy is a common barrier to participation in clinical trials. Patient information leaflets (PILs) used in clinical trials are often lengthy, complex and have poor readability; this is a persistent and prevalent problem common to trials across the world. Simplifying the information provided in PILs can lead to improved understanding, comprehension and knowledge. The aim of this project was to develop recommendations for developing accessible PILs for clinical trials through a literature review of published and grey literature and co-working with marginalised communities, patients, and health and social care charities., Methods: A literature review of MEDLINE, Embase and online resources was conducted, and recommendations for developing accessible PILs were extracted from eligible published and grey literature. Grey literature which contained insights into more inclusive forms of communication was also identified and summarised. Meetings were held with two racially marginalised community groups, two groups involving autistic adults and/or adults with learning difficulties and a patient advisory group. Examples of accessible PILs were shared and discussions held about the content and format of the PILs and suggestions for changes/improvements. National Voices, a coalition of health and social care charities in England, held a national online workshop with charities and lived experience partners. Recommendations identified from the multiple sources were coded, collated and refined to develop an overarching framework of recommendations., Results: The framework consists of 74 recommendations for developing accessible PILs for clinical trials. Recommendations cover the five topics of formatting, information presentation, writing style, content and accessibility., Conclusions: This project has developed a comprehensive framework of recommendations to guide researchers in the development of accessible PILs for clinical trials. Findings from previous research and from co-working with marginalised communities, patients and health and social care charities were collated to ensure that a diverse range of voices and experiences informed the framework. These recommendations aim to support researchers to develop better study information to reduce English language literacy as a barrier to participation in clinical trials., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) care pathway is a clinically important and cost-effective intervention found to improve pain outcomes over one year for people with chronic pain three months after total knee replacement (TKR). We followed up STAR trial participants to evaluate the longer-term clinical- and cost-effectiveness of this care pathway., Methods: Participants who remained enrolled on the trial at one year were contacted by post at a median of four years after randomisation and invited to complete a questionnaire comprising the same outcomes collected during the trial. We captured pain (co-primary outcome using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity and interference scales; scored 0-10, best to worst), function, neuropathic characteristics, emotional aspects of pain, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction. Electronic hospital informatics data on hospital resource use for the period of one to four years post-randomisation were collected from participating hospital sites. The economic evaluation took an National Health Service (NHS) secondary care perspective, with a four-year time horizon., Results: Overall, 226/337 (67%) of participants returned completed follow-up questionnaires, yielding adjusted between-group differences in BPI means of -0.42 (95% confidence interval, CI (-1.07, 0.23); p = 0.20) for pain severity and - 0.64 (95% CI -1.41, 0.12); p = 0.10) for pain interference. Analysis using a multiple imputed data set (n = 337) showed an incremental net monetary benefit in favour of the STAR care pathway of £3,525 (95% CI -£990 to £8,039) at a £20,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, leading to a probability that the intervention was cost-effective of 0.94., Conclusions: The magnitude of the longer-term benefits of the STAR care pathway are uncertain due to attrition of trial participants; however, there is a suggestion of some degree of sustained clinical benefit at four years. The care pathway remained cost-effective at four years., Trial Registration: ISRCTN: 92,545,361., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Sleep disturbance is common in hospital. The hospital environment can have a negative impact on sleep quality, through factors such as noise, light, temperature, and nursing care disruptions. Poor sleep can lead to delays in recovery, wound healing, and increase risk of post-operative infection., Methods: We conducted a systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of non-pharmacological sleep interventions for improving inpatient sleep. The primary outcome was sleep quality, the secondary outcome was length of hospital stay, the harm outcome was adverse events. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 17 th February 2022. Meta-analysis was conducted using a fixed effects model, with narrative synthesis for studies with no useable data. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool., Results: 76 studies identified with 5375 people randomised comparing 85 interventions. Interventions focused on physical sleep aids (n = 26), relaxation (n = 25), manual therapy (n = 12), music (n = 9), psychological therapy (n = 5), light therapy (n = 3), sleep protocols (n = 2), milk and honey (n = 1), exercise (n = 1), and nursing care (n = 1). In meta-analysis, medium to large improvements in sleep quality were noted for sleep aids, relaxation, music, and manual therapies. Results were generally consistent in studies at lower risk of bias. Length of hospital stay and adverse events were reported for some studies, with benefit in some trials but this was not consistent across all interventions., Conclusions: Physical sleep aids, relaxation, manual therapy and music interventions have a strong evidence base for improving inpatient sleep quality. Research is needed to evaluate how to optimise interventions into routine care., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage and single-stage revision surgeries among patients with infected primary hip arthroplasty. Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary arthroplasty revised with single-stage or two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014 were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HRs) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies. In total, 535 primary hip arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,525 person-years) and 1,605 with two-stage procedure (5,885 person-years). All-cause re-revision was higher following single-stage revision, especially in the first three months (HR at 3 months = 1.98 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14 to 3.43), p = 0.009). The risks were comparable thereafter. Re-revision for PJI was higher in the first three postoperative months for single-stage revision and waned with time (HR at 3 months = 1.81 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.68), p = 0.003; HR at 6 months = 1.25 (95% CI 0.71 to 2.21), p = 0.441; HR at 12 months = 0.94 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.63), p = 0.819). Patients initially managed with a single-stage revision received fewer revision operations (mean 1.3 (SD 0.7) vs 2.2 (SD 0.6), p < 0.001). Mortality rates were comparable between these two procedures (29/10,000 person-years vs 33/10,000). The risk of unplanned re-revision was lower following two-stage revision, but only in the early postoperative period. The lower overall number of revision procedures associated with a single-stage revision strategy and the equivalent mortality rates to two-stage revision are reassuring. With appropriate counselling, single-stage revision is a viable option for the treatment of hip PJI., Competing Interests: We declare that we have no conflict of interest. E. Lenguerrand, M. R. Whitehouse, and A. W. Blom are National Joint Registry (NJR) Lot 2 Contract (NJR statistical analysis, support, and associated services) representatives in the NJR editorial committee. E. Lenguerrand reports an institutional grant (paid to University of Bristol) from the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP) (FTS 010307-2022: Statistical Analysis, Support and Associated Services NJR), not related to this study. E. Lenguerrand also reports membership of the following steering committees: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) HSDR-First Contact Physiotherapy in Primary Care, and NIHR PGfAR (NIHR201076): Adapting and testing an intervention for carers of people with dementia-CARECOACH. M. L. Porter reports a previous role as Medical Director of the NJR. M. R. Whitehouse reports a number of institutional grants (paid to University of Bristol) from the NIHR, not related to this study, as well as a role with NIHR Clinical Research Network (CRN) (as Trauma and Emergencies CRN Specialty Lead for the West of England). E. Lenguerrand and A. W. Blom had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. The authors have conformed to the NJR’s standard protocol for data access and publication. The views expressed represent those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NJR Steering Committee or HQIP, who do not vouch for how the information is presented., (© 2023 Author(s) et al.)

For many people with advanced osteoarthritis, total knee replacement is an effective treatment to relieve pain and improve function. However, 10-34% of people experience chronic postsurgical pain in the months and years after total knee replacement. The Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) randomised controlled trial (ISCRTN92545361) evaluated the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a new multifaceted and personalised care pathway, compared with usual care, for people with pain at three months after total knee replacement. Our objective was to identify factors promoting or inhibiting its implementation, and to inform future training and wider implementation of the pathway. We conducted a prospective process evaluation using qualitative interviews with eight Extended Scope Practitioners and six Principal Investigators from seven trial sites who were involved in delivering the STAR care pathway during the trial. We used Normalization Process Theory as a theoretical framework for qualitative data collection and content analysis. We identified that factors promoting the implementation of the pathway were quick familiarisation with the pathway, valuing patient-centredness, formalising referral processes, and increasing confidence to address neuropathic pain. Challenges to implementation were availability of time and resources, sensitivity in referral process, and ensuring collective understanding of the pathway. These findings have enabled us to make recommendations about the future implementation of the STAR care pathway and will inform the development of a training package, and updated manual for successful delivery in usual care. Furthermore, this model of care has potential value in diverse elective surgeries and pain conditions., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Moore et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Periprosthetic hip-joint infection is a multifaceted and highly detrimental outcome for patients and clinicians. The incidence of prosthetic joint infection reported within two years of primary hip arthroplasty ranges from 0.8% to 2.1%. Costs of treatment are over five-times greater in people with periprosthetic hip joint infection than in those with no infection. Currently, there are no national evidence-based guidelines for treatment and management of this condition to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. The aim of this study is to develop guidelines based on evidence from the six-year INFection and ORthopaedic Management (INFORM) research programme. We used a consensus process consisting of an evidence review to generate items for the guidelines and online consensus questionnaire and virtual face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the guidelines. The consensus panel comprised 21 clinical experts in orthopaedics, primary care, rehabilitation, and healthcare commissioning. The final output from the consensus process was a 14-item guideline. The guidelines make recommendations regarding increased vigilance and monitoring of those at increased risk of infection; diagnosis including strategies to ensure the early recognition of prosthetic infection and referral to orthopaedic teams; treatment, including early use of DAIR and revision strategies; and postoperative management including appropriate physical and psychological support and antibiotic strategies. We believe the implementation of the INFORM guidelines will inform treatment protocols and clinical pathways to improve the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection., Competing Interests: The authors have no further conflicts to declare (see funding information)., (© 2023 Author(s) et al.)

Objectives: To determine whether patient reported outcomes improve after single stage versus two stage revision surgery for prosthetic joint infection of the hip, and to determine the cost effectiveness of these procedures., Design: Pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial., Setting: High volume tertiary referral centres or orthopaedic units in the UK (n=12) and in Sweden (n=3), recruiting from 1 March 2015 to 19 December 2018., Participants: 140 adults (aged ≥18 years) with a prosthetic joint infection of the hip who required revision (65 randomly assigned to single stage and 75 to two stage revision)., Interventions: A computer generated 1:1 randomisation list stratified by hospital was used to allocate participants with prosthetic joint infection of the hip to a single stage or a two stage revision procedure., Main Outcome Measures: The primary intention-to-treat outcome was pain, stiffness, and functional limitations 18 months after randomisation, measured by the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and joint infection. The economic evaluation (only assessed in UK participants) compared quality adjusted life years and costs between the randomised groups., Results: The mean age of participants was 71 years (standard deviation 9) and 51 (36%) were women. WOMAC scores did not differ between groups at 18 months (mean difference 0.13 (95% confidence interval -8.20 to 8.46), P=0.98); however, the single stage procedure was better at three months (11.53 (3.89 to 19.17), P=0.003), but not from six months onwards. Intraoperative events occurred in five (8%) participants in the single stage group and 20 (27%) in the two stage group (P=0.01). At 18 months, nine (14%) participants in the single stage group and eight (11%) in the two stage group had at least one marker of possible ongoing infection (P=0.62). From the perspective of healthcare providers and personal social services, single stage revision was cost effective with an incremental net monetary benefit of £11 167 (95% confidence interval £638 to £21 696) at a £20 000 per quality adjusted life years threshold (£1.0; $1.1; €1.4)., Conclusions: At 18 months, single stage revision compared with two stage revision for prosthetic joint infection of the hip showed no superiority by patient reported outcome. Single stage revision had a better outcome at three months, fewer intraoperative complications, and was cost effective. Patients prefer early restoration of function, therefore, when deciding treatment, surgeons should consider patient preferences and the cost effectiveness of single stage surgery., Trial Registration: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN10956306., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: support from NIHR for the submitted work. RGH reports individual payments as co-chair, UK Committee on Research Integrity. SM reports payments for organising the Palacademy Basic Sciences Course for Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons trainees by Heraeus. OR reports research funding paid to employer by Pfizer, educational/lecturer payments from Link Sweden, payments for Novartis advisory board, and unpaid roles as past president, International Society of Arthroplasty Registries, and deputy editor, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. MW reports an institutional payment for an institutional contract between Exeter Hip Unit and Stryker Orthopaedics, personal payments in relation to intellectual property for Exeter Hip System, patents in relation to Exeter Hip Systems, honorary treasurer (British Hip Society), and associate editor (Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England). MRW is principal investigator of the Lot 2 contract for statistical analysis and support for the National Joint Registry from Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, principal investigator on an independently conducted research grant, funded by CeramTec investigating the association of total hip replacement bearing materials with outcomes, editor of two general orthopaedic textbooks for which he receives royalties from Taylor and Francis, undertakes teaching on basic sciences for Orthopaedic trainees preparing for the for Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons and on courses on the principles and performance of total hip replacements for trainees with market rate institutional payment for this teaching from Heraeus, editorial board member of Bone Joint Journal and Hip International, and research committee member of British Orthopaedic Association and British Hip Society., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage revision surgery and single-stage revision surgery among patients with infected primary knee arthroplasty., Methods: Patients with a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of their primary knee arthroplasty, initially revised with a single-stage or a two-stage procedure in England and Wales between 2003 and 2014, were identified from the National Joint Registry. We used Poisson regression with restricted cubic splines to compute hazard ratios (HR) at different postoperative periods. The total number of revisions and re-revisions undergone by patients was compared between the two strategies., Results: A total of 489 primary knee arthroplasties were revised with single-stage procedure (1,390 person-years) and 2,377 with two-stage procedure (8,349 person-years). The adjusted incidence rates of all-cause re-revision and for infection were comparable between these strategies (HR overall five years, 1.15 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 1.52), p = 0.308; HR overall five years, 0.99 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.39), p = 0.949, respectively). Patients initially managed with single-stage revision received fewer revision procedures overall than after two-stage revision (1.2 vs 2.2, p < 0.001). Mortality was lower for single-stage revision between six and 18 months postoperative (HR at six months, 0.51 (95% CI 0.25 to 1.00), p = 0.049 HR at 18 months, 0.33 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.99), p = 0.048) and comparable at other timepoints., Conclusion: The risk of re-revision was similar between single- and two-stage revision for infected primary knee arthroplasty. Single-stage group required fewer revisions overall, with lower or comparable mortality at specific postoperative periods. The single-stage revision is a safe and effective strategy to treat infected knee arthroplasties. There is potential for increased use to reduce the burden of knee PJI for patients, and for the healthcare system.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res  2022;11(10):690-699.

Objective: As part of the STAR Programme, a comprehensive study exploring long-term pain after surgery, we investigated how pain and function, health-related quality of life (HRQL), and healthcare resource use evolved over 5 years after total knee replacement (TKR) for those with and without chronic pain 1 year after their primary surgery., Methods: We used data from the Clinical Outcomes in Arthroplasty Study prospective cohort study, which followed patients undergoing TKR from two English hospitals for 5 years. Chronic pain was defined using the Oxford Knee Score Pain Subscale (OKS-PS) where participants reporting a score of 14 or lower were classified as having chronic pain 1-year postsurgery. Pain and function were measured with the OKS, HRQL using the EuroQoL-5 Dimension, resource use from yearly questionnaires, and costs estimated from a healthcare system perspective. We analysed the changes in OKS-PS, HRQL and resource use over a 5-year follow-up period. Multiple imputation accounted for missing data., Results: Chronic pain was reported in 70/552 operated knees (12.7%) 1 year after surgery. The chronic pain group had worse pain, function and HRQL presurgery and postsurgery than the non-chronic pain group. Those without chronic pain markedly improved right after surgery, then plateaued. Those with chronic pain improved slowly but steadily. Participants with chronic pain reported greater healthcare resource use and costs than those without, especially 1 year after surgery, and mostly from hospital readmissions. 64.7% of those in chronic pain recovered during the following 4 years, while 30.9% fluctuated in and out of chronic pain., Conclusion: Although TKR is often highly beneficial, some patients experienced chronic pain postsurgery. Although many fluctuated in their pain levels and most recovered over time, identifying people most likely to have chronic pain and supporting their recovery would benefit patients and healthcare systems., Competing Interests: Competing interests: NKA reports consultancy fees outside the scope of this work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Approximately 20% of people experience chronic pain after total knee replacement, but effective treatments are not available. We aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a new care pathway for chronic pain after total knee replacement., Methods: We did an unmasked, parallel group, pragmatic, superiority, randomised, controlled trial at eight UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals. People with chronic pain at 3 months after total knee replacement surgery were randomly assigned (2:1) to the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) care pathway plus usual care, or to usual care alone. The STAR intervention aimed to identify underlying causes of chronic pain and enable onward referrals for targeted treatment through a 3-month post-surgery assessment with an extended scope practitioner and telephone follow-up over 12 months. Co-primary outcomes were self-reported pain severity and pain interference in the replaced knee, assessed with the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity and interference scales at 12 months (scored 0-10, best to worst) and analysed on an as-randomised basis. Resource use, collected from electronic hospital records and participants, was valued with UK reference costs. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated from EQ-5D-5L responses. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN92545361., Findings: Between Sept 6, 2016, and May 31, 2019, 363 participants were randomly assigned to receive the intervention plus usual care (n=242) or to receive usual care alone (n=121). Participants had a median age of 67 years (IQR 61 to 73), 217 (60%) of 363 were female, and 335 (92%) were White. 313 (86%) patients provided follow-up data at 12 months after randomisation (213 assigned to the intervention plus usual care and 100 assigned to usual care alone). At 12 months, the mean between-group difference in the BPI severity score was -0·65 (95% CI -1·17 to -0·13; p=0·014) and the mean between-group difference in the BPI interference score was -0·68 (-1·29 to -0·08; p=0·026), both favouring the intervention. From an NHS and personal social services perspective, the intervention was cost-effective (greater improvement with lower cost), with an incremental net monetary benefit of £1256 (95% CI 164 to 2348) at £20 000 per QALY threshold. One adverse reaction of participant distress was reported in the intervention group., Interpretation: STAR is a clinically effective and cost-effective intervention to improve pain outcomes over 1 year for people with chronic pain at 3 months after total knee replacement surgery., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., Competing Interests: AWB and VW have received funding from Stryker for research unrelated to this work. DAW has received grant funding from Pfizer; consulting fees from Pfizer, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Reckitt- Benckiser, Galapagos, and EliLilly; and payment for lectures, presentations, and educational events from Pfizer and AbbVie, all unrelated to this work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license.)

Background: To determine unicompartmental (UKR) and total knee replacement (TKR) revision rates, compare UKR revision rates with what they would have been had they received TKR instead, and assess subsequent re-revision and 90-day mortality rates., Methods: Using National Joint Registry data, we estimated UKR and TKR revision and mortality rates. Flexible parametric survival modeling (FPM) was used to model failure in TKR and make estimates for UKR. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to compare cumulative re-revision for revised UKRs and TKRs., Results: Ten-year UKR revision rates were 2.5 times higher than expected from TKR, equivalent to 70 excess revisions/1000 cases within 10 years (5861 excess revisions in this cohort). Revision rates were 2.5 times higher for the highest quartile volume UKR surgeons compared to the same quartile for TKR and 3.9 times higher for the lowest quartiles respectively. Re-revision rates of revised TKRs (10 years = 17.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.4-18.7) were similar to revised UKRs (15.2%, 95% CI 13.4-17.1) and higher than revision rates following primary TKR (3.3%, 95% CI 3.1-3.5). Ninety-day mortality rates were lower after UKR compared with TKR (0.08% vs 0.33%) and lower than predicted had UKR patients received a TKR (0.18%), equivalent to 1 fewer death per 1000 cases., Conclusion: UKR revision rates were substantially higher than TKR even when demographics and caseload differences were accounted for; however, fewer deaths occur after UKR. This should be considered when forming treatment guidelines and commissioning services. Re-revision rates were similar between revised UKRs and TKRs, but considerably higher than for primary TKR, therefore UKR cannot be considered an intermediate procedure., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Knee replacements are highly successful for many people, but if a knee replacement fails, revision surgery is generally required. Surgeons and patients may choose from a range of implant components and combinations that make up knee replacement constructs, all with potential implications for how long a knee replacement will last. To inform surgeon and patient decisions, a comprehensive synthesis of data from randomised controlled trials is needed to evaluate the effects of different knee replacement implants on overall construct survival. Due to limited follow-up in trials, joint registry analyses are also needed to assess the long-term survival of constructs. Finally, economic modelling can identify cost-effective knee replacement constructs for different patient groups., Methods and Analysis: In this protocol, we describe systematic reviews and network meta-analyses to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of knee replacement constructs used in total and unicompartmental knee replacement and analyses of two national joint registries to assess long-term outcomes. Knee replacement constructs are defined by bearing materials and mobility, constraint, fixation and patella resurfacing. For men and women in different age groups, we will compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of knee replacement constructs., Ethics and Dissemination: Systematic reviews are secondary analyses of published data with no ethical approval required. We will design a common joint registry analysis plan and provide registry representatives with information for submission to research or ethics committees. The project has been assessed by the National Health Service (NHS) REC committee and does not require ethical review.Study findings will be disseminated to clinicians, researchers and administrators through open access articles, presentations and websites. Specific UK-based groups will be informed of results including National Institute for Health Research and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, as well as international orthopaedic associations and charities. Effective dissemination to patients will be guided by our patient-public involvement group and include written lay summaries and infographics., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42019134059 and CRD42019138015., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Vitamin E highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) was developed to reduce wear in total hip replacement (THR). This formal systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide independent synthesis of wear characteristics of Vitamin E treated HXLPE compared to HXPLE/UHMWPE. Secondary outcome measures were differences in revision rates and functional scores., Methods: We performed a formal systematic review as per PRISMA guidelines; literature searches were conducted on 14 November 2017 (MEDLINE, Embase on Ovid, and the Cochrane Library). We included randomised controlled trials, analyses of joint registries, and case-controlled studies of primary THR comparing cups with a vitamin E HXLPE bearing with bearing surfaces made from other types of polyethylene. Initial screening was performed by 2 independent assessors; disagreement resolved in discussion with a third reviewer. Studies were evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Data extraction permitted meta-analysis., Results: 372 studies were identified on initial screening, 5 studies met the eligibility criteria. There was no significant heterogeneity between studies. There was variable risk of bias. At a mean of 35 (range 20-60) months, Vitamin E HXLPE had significant advantages over highly cross-linked polyethylene with regards total femoral head penetration ( p = 0.004). Given the RSA measurement errors this may not be clinically significant.There were neither significant differences in revision rates nor Harris Hip Scores ( p = 0.06)., Conclusion: At a minimum of 3 years follow-up there was reduced total femoral head penetration for vitamin E HXLPE over HXLPE. This bearing surface does not, as yet, have clinically significant advantages in terms of revision rates or patient function over HXLPE.

Aims: There is inconsistent evidence on whether prior spinal fusion surgery adversely impacts outcomes following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between pre-existing spinal fusion surgery and the rate of complications following primary THA., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to October 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing outcomes of dislocation, revision, or reasons for revision in patients following primary THA with or without pre-existing spinal fusion surgery. Furthermore, we compared short (two or less levels) or long (three or more levels) spinal fusions to no fusion. Summary measures of association were relative risks (RRs) (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs))., Results: We identified ten articles corresponding to nine unique observational studies comprising of 1,992,366 primary THAs. No RCTs were identified. There were 32,945 cases of spinal fusion and 1,752,362 non-cases. Comparing prior spinal fusion versus no spinal fusion in primary THA, RRs (95% CI) for dislocation was 2.23 (1.81 to 2.74; seven studies), revision 2.14 (1.63 to 2.83; five studies), periprosthetic joint infection 1.71 (1.53 to 1.92; four studies), periprosthetic fracture 1.52 (1.28 to 1.81; three studies), aseptic loosening 1.76 (1.54 to 2.01; three studies), and any complications 2.82 (1.37 to 5.80; three studies) were identified. Both short and long spinal fusions, when compared with no fusion, were associated dislocation, revision, or reasons for revision., Conclusions: Patients with prior spinal fusion are at risk of adverse events following primary THA. Measures that reduce the risk of these complications should be considered in this high-risk population when undergoing primary THA. These patients should also be counselled appropriately around their risks of undergoing THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):664-670.

Objective: To evaluate the long-term clinical effectiveness of a novel group-based outpatient physical therapy (PT) following total knee replacement (TKR)., Methods: In this 2-center, unblinded, superiority, randomized controlled trial, 180 patients on a waiting list for primary TKR due to osteoarthritis were randomized to a 6 session group-based outpatient PT intervention and usual care (n = 89) or usual care alone (n = 91). The primary outcome was patient-reported functional ability measured by the Lower Extremity Functional Scale at 12 months postoperative. Secondary outcomes included knee symptoms, depression, anxiety, and satisfaction. Questionnaires were completed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively., Results: The mean difference in function between groups was 4.47 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.20, 8.75; P = 0.04) at 12 months postoperative, favoring the intervention. The mean difference in function between groups decreased over time, from 8.1 points at 3 months (95% CI 3.8, 12.4; P < 0.001) to 5.4 (95% CI 1.1, 9.8; P = 0.015) at 6 months postoperative. There were no clinically relevant differences in any secondary outcomes between groups, although patients in the intervention group were more likely to be satisfied with their PT. No serious adverse events related to the intervention were reported., Conclusion: Supplementing usual care with this group-based outpatient PT intervention led to improvements in function at 12 months after TKR, although the magnitude of the difference was below the minimum clinically important difference of 9 points. However, patient satisfaction was higher in the intervention group, and there was some evidence of clinically relevant improvements in function at 3 months., (© 2019 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objectives: We conducted a systematic meta-analysis to evaluate the incidence, temporal trends and potential risk factors for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) following primary total shoulder replacement (TSR) and elbow replacement (TER)., Methods: Longitudinal studies reporting infection outcomes following primary TSR or TER were sought from MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library up to June 2019. Incidence rates and relative risks (with 95% CIs) were calculated., Results: The search identified 105 eligible articles (108 non-overlapping studies). There were 631,854 TSRs (1,751 PJIs) and 17,485 TERs (525 PJIs). The pooled PJI incidence following TSR was 0.61% (0.34-0.93) over a follow-up period of 1.1 years. The corresponding incidence following TER was 2.53% (1.99-3.12) over a follow-up period of 3.3 years. Shoulder and elbow PJI incidence declined from the 1990s to 2010 and beyond. Males, younger age (<75 years), previous shoulder surgery, reverse TSR, rotator cuff arthropathy and inpatient TSR increased shoulder PJI risk. For TER, high body mass index, psychiatric illness, and previous elbow surgery increased PJI risk., Conclusions: Shoulder and elbow PJI may be on a temporal decline. Caution should be taken for patients at high PJI risk following primary TSR such as younger males and patients with a previous shoulder surgery., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Nearly 100 000 primary total knee replacements (TKR) are performed in the UK annually. The primary aim of TKR is pain relief, but 10%-34% of patients report chronic pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of presurgical interventions in preventing chronic pain after TKR., Design: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library and PsycINFO were searched from inception to December 2018. Screening and data extraction were performed by two authors. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool and quality of evidence was assessed by Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation., Primary and Secondary Outcomes: Pain at 6 months or longer; adverse events., Interventions: Presurgical interventions aimed at improving TKR outcomes., Results: Eight randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with data from 960 participants were included. The studies involved nine eligible comparisons. We found moderate-quality evidence of no effect of exercise programmes on chronic pain after TKR, based on a meta-analysis of 6 interventions with 229 participants (standardised mean difference 0.20, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.47, I 2 =0%). Sensitivity analysis restricted to studies at overall low risk of bias confirmed findings. Another RCT of exercise with no data available for meta-analysis showed no benefit. Studies evaluating combined exercise and education intervention (n=1) and education alone (n=1) suggested similar findings. Adverse event data were reported by most studies, but events were too few to draw conclusions., Conclusions: We found low to moderate-quality evidence to suggest that neither preoperative exercise, education nor a combination of both is effective in preventing chronic pain after TKR. This review also identified a lack of evaluations of other preoperative interventions, such as multimodal pain management, which may improve long-term pain outcomes after TKR., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42017041382., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Outside of this work, VW and AWB are co-applicants on an institutional grant from Stryker for a study evaluating the outcomes of the Triathlon knee replacement., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Identifying prognostic factors for outcomes after joint replacement could improve the provision of stratified care. This systematic review evaluated whether social support is a prognostic factor for better patient-reported outcomes after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR)., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO were searched from inception to April 2019. Cohort studies evaluating the association between social support and patient-reported outcomes at three months or longer after THR or TKR were included. Data were extracted from study reports. Study quality was assessed using the QUIPS tool. Data were synthesized using meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016041485)., Findings: Searches identified 5,810 articles and 56 studies with data from 119,165 patients were included. In meta-analysis, the presence of social support had a beneficial effect on long-term post-operative WOMAC (mean difference 2.88; 95% CIs 1.30; 4.46) and Oxford Knee Score (0.29; 0.12, 0.45). Social support measured using a validated questionnaire was found to be associated with WOMAC pain (0.04; 0.00, 0.08) but not WOMAC function (-0.01; -0.12, 0.11). The presence of social support had a positive association with some SF-36 subscales but not others. For all outcomes, results of narrative synthesis were inconsistent., Interpretation: There is evidence that social support is a prognostic factor for some outcomes after joint replacement. Development and evaluation of complex interventions to improve social support and social integration is warranted., Funding: This study was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interests None of the authors declare any competing interest with the submitted work. Outside of the submitted work, VW and AWB receive institutional research funding from Stryker.

Background: Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a challenging complication of total elbow replacement (TER). Potential surgical treatments include one- or two-stage revision; however, the best treatment for elbow PJI is not clearly defined. We conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines to compare the clinical effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision surgery for elbow PJI using re-infection (recurrent and new infections) rates; mortality; clinical measures of function, pain, and satisfaction; and non-infection related adverse events., Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library were searched up to June 2019 to identify observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that had recruited patients with elbow PJI following TER and treated with one- or two-stage revision. Of 96 retrieved articles, 2 one-stage and 6 two-stage revision studies were eligible. No RCT was identified. Arcsine transformation was used in estimating rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative organism for PJI of the elbow (24 of 71 elbow PJIs). The re-infection rate (95% CI) for one-stage (7 elbows) ranged from 0.0% (0.0-79.3) to 16.7% (3.0-56.4) and that for two-stage revision (87 elbows) from 0.0% (0.0-49.0) to 20.0% (3.6-62.4). Non-infection related adverse event rate for one-stage (based on a single study) was 16.7% (3.0-56.4) and that for two-stage ranged from 11.8% (4.7-26.6) to 20.0% (3.6-62.4). There were no mortality events recorded following one- or two-stage revision surgery and postoperative clinical measures of function, pain, and satisfaction could not be effectively compared because of limited data., Conclusions: No strong conclusions can be drawn because of limited data. The one-stage revision may be potentially at least as clinically effective as two-stage revision, but further data is needed. There are clear gaps in the existing literature and studies are urgently warranted to assess the clinical effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision strategies for PJI following TER., Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO 2018: CRD42018118002 .

Background: Dislocation following total hip replacement (THR) is associated with repeated hospitalisations and substantial costs to the health system. Factors influencing dislocation following primary THR are not well understood. We aimed to assess the associations of patient-, surgery-, implant- and hospital-related factors with dislocation risk following primary THR., Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of all longitudinal studies reporting these associations. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to March 8, 2019. Summary measures of association were calculated using relative risks (RRs) (with 95% confidence intervals, CIs). The review is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42019121378., Findings: We identified 149 articles based on 125 unique studies with data on 4 633 935 primary THRs and 35 264 dislocations. The incidence rates of dislocation ranged from 0·12% to 16·13%, with an overall pooled rate of 2·10% (1·83-2·38) over a weighted mean follow-up duration of 6 years. Using median year of data collection, there was a significant decline in dislocation rates from 1971 to 2015. Comparing males vs females, age ≥70 vs <70 years, and high vs low income, RRs (95% CIs) for dislocation were 0·97 (0·88-1·08), 1·27 (1·02-1·57), and 0·79 (0·74-0·85) respectively. White ethnicity, drug use disorder, and social deprivation were each associated with an increased dislocation risk. Comparing body mass index (BMI) ≥30 vs. <30 kg/m 2 , the RR (95% CI) for dislocation was 1·38 (1·03-1·85). Medical and surgical history-related factors associated with dislocation risk included neurological disorder, psychiatric disease, comorbidity indices, previous surgery including spinal fusion, and surgical indications including avascular necrosis, rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory arthritis, and osteonecrosis. Surgical factors such as the anterolateral, direct anterior, or lateral approach and posterior with short external rotator and capsule repair were each associated with reduced dislocation risk. At the implant level, larger femoral head diameters, elevated acetabular liners, dual mobility cups, cemented fixations and standard femoral neck lengths reduced the risk of dislocation. Hospital-related factors such as experienced surgeons and high surgeon procedure volume each reduced the risk of dislocation., Interpretation: Dislocation following primary THR is on a temporal decline. Surgical approaches that reduce dislocation risk can be used by clinicians when performing primary THR. Alternative bearings such as dual mobility can be used in individuals at high risk of dislocation. Modifiable risk factors such as high BMI and comorbidities may be amenable to optimisation prior to surgery., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interests MRW and AWB undertake teaching on basic sciences for Orthopaedic trainees preparing for the Fellowship of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (FRCS); their institution receives market rate payment for this teaching from Heraeus and DePuy. VW and AWB are co-applicants on a grant from Stryker investigating the outcome of the Triathlon total knee replacement.

Objectives: For many people with advanced osteoarthritis, total knee replacement (TKR) is an effective treatment for relieving pain and improving function. Features of perioperative care may be associated with the adverse event of chronic pain 6 months or longer after surgery; effects may be direct, for example, through nerve damage or surgical complications, or indirect through adverse events. This systematic review aims to evaluate whether non-surgical perioperative interventions prevent long-term pain after TKR., Methods: We conducted a systematic review of perioperative interventions for adults with osteoarthritis receiving primary TKR evaluated in a randomised controlled trial (RCT). We searched The Cochrane Library , MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL until February 2018. After screening, two reviewers evaluated articles. Studies at low risk of bias according to the Cochrane tool were included., Interventions: Perioperative non-surgical interventions; control receiving no intervention or alternative treatment., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Pain or score with pain component assessed at 6 months or longer postoperative., Results: 44 RCTs at low risk of bias assessed long-term pain. Intervention heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis and definitive statements on effectiveness. Good-quality research provided generally weak evidence for small reductions in long-term pain with local infiltration analgesia (three studies), ketamine infusion (one study), pregabalin (one study) and supported early discharge (one study) compared with no intervention. For electric muscle stimulation (two studies), anabolic steroids (one study) and walking training (one study) there was a suggestion of more clinically important benefit. No concerns relating to long-term adverse events were reported. For a range of treatments there was no evidence linking them with unfavourable pain outcomes., Conclusions: To prevent chronic pain after TKR, several perioperative interventions show benefits and merit further research. Good-quality studies assessing long-term pain after perioperative interventions are feasible and necessary to ensure that patients with osteoarthritis achieve good long-term outcomes after TKR., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

The type of fixation used in primary total knee replacement (TKR) may influence the risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess published evidence linking type of fixation (cemented, uncemented, or hybrid) with the risk of PJI following primary TKR. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies comparing fixation methods and reporting PJI incidence following primary TKR were identified in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up until November 2018. Summary measures were relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We identified 32 eligible articles (24 observational studies and 8 RCTs) involving 1,161,292 TKRs. In pooled analysis of observational studies, uncemented fixation was associated with a decreased overall PJI risk when compared with cemented fixation at 0.76 (0.64-0.89). Comparing antibiotic-loaded cemented fixation with plain cement, there was no significant difference in overall PJI risk at 0.95 (0.69-1.31), but PJI risk was increased in the first 6-month postoperative period to 1.65 (1.12-2.43). Limited data from RCTs showed no differences in PJI risk among the fixation types. Observational evidence suggests uncemented fixation may be associated with lower PJI risk in primary TKR when compared with cemented fixation. In the early postoperative period, antibiotic-loaded cemented fixation may be associated with increased PJI risk when compared with plain cement. This may either reflect appropriate selection of higher risk patients for the development of PJI to cemented and antibiotic-loaded cement or may reflect a lower PJI risk in uncemented TKR due to factors such as shorter operative time.

Background: Prosthetic joint infection is a devastating complication of knee replacement. The risk of developing a prosthetic joint infection is affected by patient, surgical, and health-care system factors. Existing evidence is limited by heterogeneity in populations studied, short follow-up, inadequate power, and does not differentiate early prosthetic joint infection, most likely related to the intervention, from late infection, more likely to occur due to haematogenous bacterial spread. We aimed to assess the overall and time-specific associations of these factors with the risk of revision due to prosthetic joint infection following primary knee replacement., Methods: In this cohort study, we analysed primary knee replacements done between 2003 and 2013 in England and Wales and the procedures subsequently revised for prosthetic joint infection between 2003 and 2014. Data were obtained from the National Joint Registry linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics data in England and the Patient Episode Database for Wales. Each primary replacement was followed for a minimum of 12 months until the end of the observation period (Dec 31, 2014) or until the date of revision for prosthetic joint infection, revision for another indication, or death (whichever occurred first). We analysed the data using Poisson and piecewise exponential multilevel models to assess the associations between patient, surgical, and health-care system factors and risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection., Findings: Of 679 010 primary knee replacements done between 2003 and 2013 in England and Wales, 3659 were subsequently revised for an indication of prosthetic joint infection between 2003 and 2014, after a median follow-up of 4·6 years (IQR 2·6-6·9). Male sex (rate ratio [RR] for male vs female patients 1·8 [95% CI 1·7-2·0]), younger age (RR for age ≥80 years vs <60 years 0·5 [0·4-0·6]), higher American Society of Anaesthesiologists [ASA] grade (RR for ASA grade 3-5 vs 1, 1·8 [1·6-2·1]), elevated body-mass index (BMI; RR for BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 vs <25 kg/m 2 1·5 [1·3-1·6]), chronic pulmonary disease (RR 1·2 [1·1-1·3]), diabetes (RR 1·4 [1·2-1·5]), liver disease (RR 2·2 [1·6-2·9]), connective tissue and rheumatic diseases (RR 1·5 [1·3-1·7]), peripheral vascular disease (RR 1·4 [1·1-1·7]), surgery for trauma (RR 1·9 [1·4-2·6]), previous septic arthritis (RR 4·9 [2·7-7·6]) or inflammatory arthropathy (RR 1·4 [1·2-1·7]), operation under general anaesthesia (RR 1·1 [1·0-1·2]), requirement for tibial bone graft (RR 2·0 [1·3-2·7]), use of posterior stabilised fixed bearing prostheses (RR for posterior stabilised fixed bearing prostheses vs unconstrained fixed bearing prostheses 1·4 [1·3-1·5]) or constrained condylar prostheses (3·5 [2·5-4·7]) were associated with a higher risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection. However, uncemented total, patellofemoral, or unicondylar knee replacement (RR for uncemented vs cemented total knee replacement 0·7 [95% CI 0·6-0·8], RR for patellofemoral vs cemented total knee replacement 0·3 [0·2-0·5], and RR for unicondylar vs cemented total knee replacement 0·5 [0·5-0·6]) were associated with lower risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection. Most of these factors had time-specific effects, depending on the time period post-surgery., Interpretation: We have identified several risk factors for revision for prosthetic joint infection following knee replacement. Some of these factors are modifiable, and the use of targeted interventions or strategies could lead to a reduced risk of revision for prosthetic joint infection. Non-modifiable factors and the time-specific nature of the effects we have observed will allow clinicians to appropriately counsel patients preoperatively and tailor follow-up regimens., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI), although uncommon, is a dreaded and devastating complication of total hip replacement (THR). Whether implant-related factors, such as the fixation method, influences the risk of PJI following THR is contentious. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the body of evidence linking fixation methods (cemented, uncemented, hybrid, or reverse hybrid) with the risk of PJI following primary THR. Observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fixation methods, and reporting PJI incidence following THR, were identified through MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant studies up to 24 April 2019. Summary measures were relative risks (RRs) (95% confidence intervals, CIs). We identified 22 eligible articles (based on 11 distinct observational cohort studies comprising 2,260,428 THRs and 4 RCTs comprising 945 THRs). In pooled analyses of observational studies, all cemented fixations (plain and antibiotic combined), plain cemented fixations, hybrid fixations, and reverse hybrid fixations were each associated with an increased overall PJI risk when compared with uncemented fixations: 1.10 (95% CI: 1.04-1.17), 1.50 (95% CI: 1.27-1.77), 1.49 (95% CI: 1.36-1.64), and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.14-1.95), respectively. However, in the first six months, uncemented fixations were associated with increased PJI risk when compared to all cemented fixations. Compared to antibiotic-loaded cemented fixations, plain cemented fixations were associated with an increased PJI risk (1.52; 95% CI: 1.36-1.70). One RCT showed an increased PJI risk comparing plain cemented fixations with antibiotic-loaded cemented fixations. Uncemented and antibiotic-loaded cemented fixations remain options for the prevention of PJI in primary THR., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Background: Prosthetic implants used in total hip replacements (THR) have a range of bearing surface combinations (metal-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-ceramic, and metal-on-metal), head sizes (small [<36 mm in diameter] and large [≥36 mm in diameter]), and fixation techniques (cemented, uncemented, hybrid, and reverse hybrid). These can influence prosthesis survival, patients' quality of life, and healthcare costs., Objectives: To compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of implants for patients of different age and sex profiles., Methods: We developed a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of various implants against small-head cemented metal-on-polyethylene implants. The probability that patients required 1 or more revision surgeries was estimated from analyses of more than 1 million patients in the UK and Swedish hip joint registries, for men and women younger than 55, 55 to 64, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and 85 years and older. Implant and healthcare costs were estimated from local procurement prices, national tariffs, and the literature. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated using published utility estimates for patients undergoing THR in the United Kingdom., Results: Small-head cemented metal-on-polyethylene implants were the most cost-effective for men and women older than 65 years. These findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. Small-head cemented ceramic-on-polyethylene implants were most cost-effective in men and women younger than 65 years, but these results were more uncertain., Conclusions: The older the patient group, the more likely that the cheapest implants, small-head cemented metal-on-polyethylene implants, were cost-effective. We found no evidence that uncemented, hybrid, or reverse hybrid implants were the most cost-effective option for any patient group. Our findings can influence clinical practice and procurement decisions for healthcare payers worldwide., (Copyright © 2019 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a catastrophic complication of shoulder arthroplasty. Commonly used surgical treatments include one- or two-stage revision, but their effectiveness in controlling infection is uncertain. We aimed to compare re-infection (recurrent and new infections) rates; clinical measures of function and pain; and noninfection complication rates of one- and two-stage revision surgery for shoulder PJI using a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library to February 2018. Longitudinal studies conducted in patients with shoulder PJI treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision were eligible. No clinical trials were identified. Re-infection rates were meta-analysed using random-effect models after arcsine transformation. The re-infection rate (95% CI) in pooled analysis of eight one-stage studies (147 participants) was 5.3% (1.4-10.6). The corresponding rate for 27 two-stage studies (351 participants) was 11.5% (6.0-18.1). Postoperative clinical measures of function and pain were not significantly different between the two revision strategies. The pooled noninfection complication rate (95% CI) for one-stage and two-stage revision was 12.1% (6.1-19.5) and 18.9% (8.4-31.9) respectively. New evidence suggests one-stage revision is at least equally as effective as the two-stage in controlling infection, maintaining joint function, and improving complications in shoulder PJI.

Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified several variants associated with platelet function phenotypes; however, the proportion of variance explained by the identified variants is mostly small. Rare coding variants, particularly those with high potential for impact on protein structure/function, may have substantial impact on phenotype but are difficult to detect by GWAS. The main purpose of this study was to identify low frequency or rare variants associated with platelet function using genotype data from the Illumina HumanExome Bead Chip. Three family-based cohorts of European ancestry, including ~4,000 total subjects, comprised the discovery cohort and two independent cohorts, one of European and one of African American ancestry, were used for replication. Optical aggregometry in platelet-rich plasma was performed in all the discovery cohorts in response to adenosine diphosphate (ADP), epinephrine, and collagen. Meta-analyses were performed using both gene-based and single nucleotide variant association methods. The gene-based meta-analysis identified a significant association (P = 7.13 × 10 -7 ) between rare genetic variants in ANKRD26 and ADP-induced platelet aggregation. One of the ANKRD26 SNVs - rs191015656, encoding a threonine to isoleucine substitution predicted to alter protein structure/function, was replicated in Europeans. Aggregation increases of ~20-50% were observed in heterozygotes in all cohorts. Novel genetic signals in ABCG1 and HCP5 were also associated with platelet aggregation to ADP in meta-analyses, although only results for HCP5 could be replicated. The SNV in HCP5 intersects epigenetic signatures in CD41+ megakaryocytes suggesting a new functional role in platelet biology for HCP5. This is the first study to use gene-based association methods from SNV array genotypes to identify rare variants related to platelet function. The molecular mechanisms and pathophysiological relevance for the identified genetic associations requires further study.

Objectives: We aimed to assess infection control rates after DAIR in patients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following joint arthroplasty and evaluate factors associated with infection control using a systematic review and meta-analysis., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane databases and reference lists of relevant studies up to May 2017. Longitudinal studies conducted in patients with PJI treated exclusively by DAIR were eligible. Infection control rates were meta-analysed using random-effect models after arcsine transformation., Results: We included 93 articles based on 99 unique observational studies with data on 4897 PJIs treated by DAIR. The infection control rate for DAIR ranged from 11.1% to 100% with an overall pooled estimate of 61.4% (95% CI, 57.3-65.4) and a 95% prediction interval of 25.5% to 91.8%. Infection control rates remained generally similar for several relevant characteristics, except for evidence of variation by age, geographical location, type of infection and joint affected, duration of parenteral antibiotic therapy after the DAIR procedure, and period (year) of DAIR procedure., Conclusions: The DAIR approach remains an option for the treatment of PJI as it is associated with acceptable infection control rates, particularly in acute postoperative infections and infections of the hip and shoulder joints., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

One-stage and two-stage revision strategies are the two main options for treating established chronic peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip; however, there is uncertainty regarding which is the best treatment option. We aimed to compare the risk of re-infection between the two revision strategies using pooled individual participant data (IPD). Observational cohort studies with PJI of the hip treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and reporting re-infection outcomes were retrieved by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; as well as email contact with investigators. We analysed IPD of 1856 participants with PJI of the hip from 44 cohorts across four continents. The primary outcome was re-infection (recurrence of infection by the same organism(s) and/or re-infection with a new organism(s)). Hazard ratios (HRs) for re-infection were calculated using Cox proportional frailty hazards models. After a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 222 re-infections were recorded. Re-infection rates per 1000 person-years of follow-up were 16.8 (95% CI 13.6-20.7) and 32.3 (95% CI 27.3-38.3) for one-stage and two-stage strategies respectively. The age- and sex-adjusted HR of re-infection for two-stage revision was 1.70 (0.58-5.00) when compared with one-stage revision. The association remained consistently absent after further adjustment for potential confounders. The HRs did not vary importantly in clinically relevant subgroups. Analysis of pooled individual patient data suggest that a one-stage revision strategy may be as effective as a two-stage revision strategy in treating PJI of the hip.

Background: The risk of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is influenced by patient, surgical, and health-care factors. Existing evidence is based on short-term follow-up. It does not differentiate between factors associated with early onset caused by the primary intervention from those associated with later onset more likely to result from haematogenous spread. We aimed to assess the overall and time-specific associations of these factors with the risk of revision due to PJI after primary total hip replacement., Methods: We did a prospective observational cohort study analysing 623 253 primary hip procedures performed between April 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2013, in England and Wales and recorded the number of procedures revised because of PJI. We investigated the associations between risk factors and risk of revision for PJI across the overall follow-up period using Poisson multilevel models. We reinvestigated the associations by post-operative time periods (0-3 months, 3-6 months, 6-12 months, 12-24 months, >24 months) using piece-wise exponential multilevel models with period-specific effects. Data were obtained from the National Joint Registry linked to the Hospital Episode Statistics data., Findings: 2705 primary procedures were subsequently revised for an indication of PJI between 2003 and 2014, after a median (IQR) follow up of 4·6 years (2·6-7·0). Among the factors associated with an increased revision due to PJI there were male sex (1462 [1·2‰] of 1 237 170 male-years vs 1243 [0·7‰] of 1 849 691 female-years; rate ratio [RR] 1·7 [95% CI 1·6-1·8]), younger age (739 [1·1‰] of 688 000 person-years <60 years vs 242 [0·6‰] of 387 049 person-years ≥80 years; 0·7 [0·6-0·8]), elevated body-mass index (BMI; 941 [1·8‰] 517 278 person-years with a BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 vs 272 [0·9‰] of 297 686 person-years with a BMI <25 kg/m 2 ; 1·9 [1·7-2·2]), diabetes (245 [1·4‰] 178 381 person-years with diabetes vs 2120 [1·0‰] of 2 209 507 person-years without diabetes; 1·4 [1·2-1·5]), dementia (5 [10·1‰] of 497 person-years with dementia at 3 months vs 311 [2·6‰] of 120 850 person-years without dementia; 3·8 [1·2-7·8]), previous septic arthritis (22 [7·2‰] of 3055 person-years with previous infection vs 2683 [0·9‰] of 3 083 806 person-years without previous infection; 6·7 [4·2-9·8]), fractured neck of femur (66 [1·5‰] of 43 378 person-years operated for a fractured neck of femur vs 2639 [0·9‰] of 3 043 483 person-years without a fractured neck of femur; 1·8 [1·4-2·3]); and use of the lateral surgical approach (1334 [1·0‰] of 1 399 287 person-years for lateral vs 1242 [0·8 ‰] of 1 565 913 person-years for posterior; 1·3 [1·2-1·4]). Use of ceramic rather than metal bearings was associated with a decreased risk of revision for PJI (94 [0·4‰] of 239 512 person-years with ceramic-on-ceramic bearings vs 602 [0·5‰] of 1 114 239 peron-years with metal-on-polyethylene bearings at ≥24 months; RR 0·6 [0·4-0·7]; and 82 [0·4‰] of 190 884 person-years with ceramic-on-polyethyene bearings vs metal-on-polyethylene bearings at ≥24 months; 0·7 [0·5-0·9]). Most of these factors had time-specific effects. The risk of revision for PJI was marginally or not influenced by the grade of the operating surgeon, the absence of a consultant surgeon during surgey, and the volume of procedures performed by hospital or surgeon., Interpretation: Several modifiable and non-modifiable factors are associated with the risk of revision for PJI after primary hip replacement. Identification of modifiable factors, use of targeted interventions, and beneficial modulation of some of these factors could be effective in reducing the incidence of PJI. It is important for clinicians to consider non-modifiable factors and factors that exhibit time-specific effects on the risk of PJI to counsel patients appropriately preoperatively., Funding: National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is a Gold Open Access article under the CC BY 4·0 licence. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background and purpose - The impact of diabetes and glycemic control before joint replacement on clinical and patient-reported outcomes is unclear. We compared pain, function, complications, and length of hospital stay in diabetic and nondiabetic patients receiving primary total hip (THR) or knee replacement (TKR) and compared these outcomes in patients with poorly controlled versus well-controlled diabetes. Patients and methods - We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing primary THR (n = 300) or TKR (n = 287) for osteoarthritis. Self-reported diabetes and glycemic control (HbA1c ≤ or >7%) extracted from medical notes were used. Adjusted comparisons were performed with generalized linear models including body mass index (BMI) and comorbidities. Results - Diabetes prevalence was 11% (THR 8%; TKR 14%). Diabetic patients were more likely to have a higher BMI and greater number of comorbidities. The median length of hospital stay was 1 day longer in diabetic patients (p = 0.004), but this attenuated after adjustments for BMI and comorbidities (p = 0.3). Inpatient pain was greater for diabetic patients but attenuated following adjustment. The 12-month postoperative WOMAC subscales were similar by diabetes status following adjustment. There was little evidence of difference in outcomes according to glycemic control. Interpretation - The associations between diabetes and worse postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing THR or TKR for osteoarthritis appear to be predominantly due to associated obesity and comorbidities. In diabetic patients there is little evidence of association between postoperative outcome and preoperative glycemic control. The underlying mechanisms and causal pathways of obesity, diabetes, and multimorbidity that lead to worse outcomes after joint replacement are not well known.

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an important cause of morbidity and a preventable cause of deaths following lower limb joint replacement. Risk prediction scores that help to predict individual VTE risk following lower limb joint replacement may inform the development of preventive strategies and guide treatment decisions. We aimed to systematically review the evidence on the development and/or validation of risk prediction scores for VTE following lower limb joint replacement., Methods: Population-based studies that have developed and/or validated a risk prediction score for VTE following hip or knee replacement and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have evaluated the clinical impact of a score were searched for in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library to April 2018., Results: Five observational cohort studies describing five risk scores were included. No RCTs were identified. The number of component variables in a single risk score ranged from 5 to 26. Three risk scores comprised 5-8 component variables. None of the studies reported calibration or discrimination statistics. Two risk scores were externally validated in single-institution cohorts and were reported to perform well. One study evaluated the general surgery Caprini risk score in primary hip and knee replacement patients and did not find it useful for VTE risk stratification., Conclusions: Few VTE risk prediction scores in lower limb joint replacement exist and these have methodological issues, have been inadequately reported, not been sufficiently validated, and their impact on patient outcomes and decision making is unknown. Research is urgently warranted in the field. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2018: CRD42018088712., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The capacity for total knee arthroplasty to improve pain, quality of life, and functional outcomes is widely recognized. Postoperative mortality is rare but of paramount importance, and needs to be accurately quantified and conveyed to patients in order to support decision-making prior to surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine a contemporary estimate of the risk of mortality following total knee arthroplasty, including the identification of temporal trends, common causes, and modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors., Methods: We performed a systematic review with searches of MEDLINE, AMED, CAB Abstracts, and Embase. Studies in any language published from 2006 to 2016 reporting 30 or 90-day mortality following total knee arthroplasty were included, supplemented by contact with authors. Meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed for quantitative data., Results: Thirty-seven studies with mortality data from 15 different countries following over 1.75 million total knee arthroplasties formed the basis of this review. The pooled Poisson-normal random-effects meta-analysis estimates of 30 and 90-day mortality were 0.20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17% to 0.24%) and 0.39% (95% CI, 0.32% to 0.49%). Both estimates have fallen over the 10-year study period (p < 0.001). Meta-regression using the median year of surgery as a moderator showed that 30 and 90-day mortality following total knee arthroplasty fell to 0.10% (95% CI, 0.07% to 0.14%) and 0.19% (95% CI, 0.15% to 0.23%), respectively, in 2015. The leading cause of death was cardiovascular disease., Conclusions: There is an ongoing worldwide temporal decline in mortality following total knee arthroplasty. Improved patient selection and perioperative care and a healthy-population effect may account for this observation. Efforts to further reduce mortality should be targeted primarily at reducing cardiovascular events following total knee arthroplasty., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Twenty randomized controlled trials comprising 1893 primary total knee replacements were included in this review.The subvastus approach conferred superior results for mean difference (MD) in time to regain an active straight leg raise (1.7 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0 to 2.3), visual analogue score for pain on day one (0.8 points on a scale out of 10, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.4) and total range of knee movement at one week (7°, 95% CI 3.2 to 10.7). The subvastus approach also resulted in fewer lateral releases (odds ratio 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.7) and less peri-operative blood loss (MD 57 mL, 95% CI 10.5 to 106.4) but prolonged surgical times (MD 9.7 min, 95% CI 3.9 to 15.6).There was no difference in Knee Society Score at six weeks or one year, or the rate of adverse events including superficial or deep infection, deep vein thrombosis or knee stiffness requiring manipulation under anaesthesia.This review demonstrates evidence of early post-operative benefits following the subvastus approach with equivalence between approaches thereafter. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:78-84. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170030., Competing Interests: ICMJE Conflict of interest statement: M. Whitehouse declares grants/grants pending from Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership; payment for development of educational presentations from Depuy, activities outside the submitted work. A. Blom declares grants/grants pending from Stryker, activity outside the submitted work.

Objective: Approximately 20% of patients experience chronic pain after total knee replacement (TKR). The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of postdischarge interventions commenced in the first 3 months after surgery in reducing the severity of chronic pain after TKR., Design: The protocol for this systematic review was registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42017041382). MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to November 2016. Randomised controlled trials of postdischarge intervention which commenced in the first 3 months after TKR surgery were included. The primary outcome of the review was self-reported pain severity at 12 months or longer after TKR. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool., Results: Seventeen trials with data from 2485 randomised participants were included. The majority of trials evaluated physiotherapy interventions (n=13); other interventions included nurse-led interventions (n=2), neuromuscular electrical stimulation (n=1) and a multidisciplinary intervention (n=1). Opportunities for meta-analysis were limited by heterogeneity. No study found a difference in long-term pain severity between trial arms, with the exception of one trial which found home-based functional exercises aimed at managing kinesiophobia resulted in lower pain severity scores at 12 months postoperatively compared with advice to stay active., Conclusion: This systematic review and narrative synthesis found no evidence that one type of physiotherapy intervention is more effective than another at reducing the severity of chronic pain after TKR. Further research is needed to evaluate non-physiotherapy interventions, including the provision of care as part of a stratified and multidisciplinary care package., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42017041382., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Background: Approximately 20% of patients experience chronic pain after total knee replacement. There is little evidence for effective interventions for the management of this pain, and current healthcare provision is patchy and inconsistent. Given the complexity of this condition, multimodal and individualised interventions matched to pain characteristics are needed. We have undertaken a comprehensive programme of work to develop a care pathway for patients with chronic pain after total knee replacement. This protocol describes the design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a complex intervention care pathway compared with usual care., Methods: This is a pragmatic two-armed, open, multi-centred randomised controlled trial conducted within secondary care in the UK. Patients will be screened at 2 months after total knee replacement and 381 patients with chronic pain at 3 months postoperatively will be recruited. Recruitment processes will be optimised through qualitative research during a 6-month internal pilot phase. Patients are randomised using a 2:1 intervention:control allocation ratio. All participants receive usual care as provided by their hospital. The intervention comprises an assessment clinic appointment at 3 months postoperatively with an Extended Scope Practitioner and up to six telephone follow-up calls over 12 months. In the assessment clinic, a standardised protocol is followed to identify potential underlying causes for the chronic pain and enable appropriate onward referrals to existing services for targeted and individualised treatment. Outcomes are assessed by questionnaires at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The co-primary outcomes are pain severity and pain interference assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory at 12 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes relate to resource use, function, neuropathic pain, mental well-being, use of pain medications, satisfaction with pain relief, pain frequency, capability, health-related quality of life and bodily pain. After trial completion, up to 30 patients in the intervention group will be interviewed about their experiences of the care pathway., Discussion: If shown to be clinically and cost-effective, this care pathway intervention could improve the management of chronic pain after total knee replacement., Trial Registration: ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN92545361 ), prospectively registered on 30 August 2016.