Gender inequity in the provision of care for hip disease: population-based cross-sectional study

Objectives To examine gender differences along the care pathway to total hip replacement. Methods We conducted a population-based cross-sectional study of 26,046 individuals aged 35 years and over in Avon and Somerset. Participants completed a questionnaire asking about care provision at five milestones on the pathway to total hip replacement. Those reporting hip disease were invited to a clinical examination. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) [95% confidence intervals (CI)] for provision of care to women compared with men. Results 3169 people reported hip pain, 2018 were invited for clinical examination, and 1405 attended (69.6%). After adjustment for age and disease severity, women were less likely than men to have consulted their general practitioner (OR 0.78, 95%-CI 0.61–1.00), as likely as men to have received drug therapy for hip pain in the previous year (OR 0.96, 95%-CI 0.74–1.24), but less likely to have been referred to specialist care (OR 0.53, 95%-CI 0.40–0.70), to have consulted an orthopaedic surgeon (OR 0.50, 95%-CI 0.32–0.78), or to be on a waiting list for total hip replacement (OR 0.41, 95%-CI 0.20–0.87). Differences remained in the 746 people who had sought care from their general practitioner, and after adjustment for willingness and fitness for surgery. Conclusions There are gender inequalities in provision of care for hip disease in England, which are not fully accounted for by gender differences in care seeking and treatment preferences. Differences in referral to specialist care by general practitioners might unwittingly contribute to this inequity. Accurate information about availability, benefits and risks of hip replacement for providers and patients, and continuing education to ensure that clinicians interpret and correct patients' assumptions could help reduce inequalities.

All cause and disease specific mortality in patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis: population based cohort study

Objective To examine all cause and disease specific mortality in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Design Population based cohort study. Setting General practices in the southwest of England. Participants 1163 patients aged 35 years or over with symptoms and radiological confirmation of osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Main outcome measures Age and sex standardised mortality ratios and multivariable hazard ratios of death after a median of 14 years’ follow-up. Results Patients with osteoarthritis had excess all cause mortality compared with the general population (standardised mortality ratio 1.55, 95% confidence interval 1.41 to 1.70). Excess mortality was observed for all disease specific causes of death but was particularly pronounced for cardiovascular (standardised mortality ratio 1.71, 1.49 to 1.98) and dementia associated mortality (1.99, 1.22 to 3.25). Mortality increased with increasing age (P for trend <0.001), male sex (adjusted hazard ratio 1.59, 1.30 to 1.96), self reported history of diabetes (1.95, 1.31 to 2.90), cancer (2.28, 1.50 to 3.47), cardiovascular disease (1.38, 1.12 to 1.71), and walking disability (1.48, 1.17 to 1.86). However, little evidence existed for increased mortality associated with previous joint replacement, obesity, depression, chronic inflammatory disease, eye disease, or presence of pain at baseline. The more severe the walking disability, the higher was the risk of death (P for trend <0.001). Conclusion Patients with osteoarthritis are at higher risk of death compared with the general population. History of diabetes, cancer, or cardiovascular disease and the presence of walking disability are major risk factors. Management of patients with osteoarthritis and walking disability should focus on effective treatment of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities, as well as on increasing physical activity.

[Irritation of the iliopsoas tendon after total hip arthroplasty]

Chronic irritation of the iliopsoas tendon is a rare cause of persistent pain after total joint replacement of the hip. In the majority of cases, pain results from a mechanical conflict between the iliopsoas tendon and the anterior edge of the acetabular cup after total hip arthroplasty. Pain can be reproduced by active flexion of the hip and by active raising of the straightened leg. In addition, painful leg raising against resistance and passive hyperextension are suggestive of an irritation of the iliopsoas tendon. Symptoms evolve from a mechanical irritation of the iliopsoas tendon and an oversized or retroverted acetabular cup, screws penetrating into the inner aspect of the ilium, or from bone cement protruding beyond the anterior acetabular rim. The diagnosis may be assumed on conventional radiographs and confirmed by CT scans. Fifteen patients with psoas irritation after total hip replacement are reported on. Eleven patients were treated surgically. The acetabular cup was revised and reoriented with more anteversion in six patients, isolated screws penetrating into the tendon were cut and leveled in three patients, and prominent bone cement in conflict with the tendon was resected once. A partial release of the iliopsoas tendon only was performed in another patient. Follow-up examination (range: 11-89 months) revealed that nine patients were free of pain and two patient had mild residual complaints. Psoas irritation in combination with total hip replacement can be prevented by a correct surgical technique, especially with proper selection of the cup size and insertion of the acetabular cup avoiding a rim position exceeding the level of the anterior acetabular rim.

Comparison of patients in three different rehabilitation settings after knee or hip arthroplasty: a natural observational, prospective study.

BACKGROUND Patients after primary hip or knee replacement surgery can benefit from postoperative treatment in terms of improvement of independence in ambulation, transfers, range of motion and muscle strength. After discharge from hospital, patients are referred to different treatment destination and modalities: intensive inpatient rehabilitation (IR), cure (medically prescribed stay at a convalescence center), or ambulatory treatment (AT) at home. The purpose of this study was to 1) measure functional health (primary outcome) and function relevant factors in patients with hip or knee arthroplasty and to compare them in relation to three postoperative management strategies: AT, Cure and IR and 2) compare the post-operative changes in patient's health status (between preoperative and the 6 month follow-up) for three rehabilitation settings. METHODS Natural observational, prospective two-center study with follow-up. Sociodemographic data and functional mobility tests, Timed Up and Go (TUG) and Iowa Level of Assistance Scale (ILOAS) of 201 patients were analysed before arthroplasty and at the end of acute hospital stay (mean duration of stay: 9.7 days +/- 3.9). Changes in health state were measured with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) before and 6 months after arthroplasty. RESULTS Compared to patients referred for IR and Cure, patients referred for AT were significantly younger and less comorbid. Patients admitted to IR had the highest functional disability before arthroplasty. Before rehabilitation, mean TUG was 40.0 s in the IR group, 33.9 s in the Cure group, and 27.5 s in the AT group, and corresponding mean ILOAS was 16.0, 13.0 and 12.2 (50.0 = worst). At the 6 months follow-up, the corresponding effect sizes of the WOMAC global score were 1.32, 1.87, and 1.51 (>0 means improvement). CONCLUSIONS Age, comorbidity and functional disability are associated with referral for intensive inpatient rehabilitation after hip or knee arthroplasty and partly affect health changes after rehabilitation.

Two knees or not two knees? Patient costs and outcomes following bilateral and unilateral total knee joint replacement surgery for OA

Aims: This study aims to address medical and non-medical direct costs and health outcomes of bilateral and unilateral total knee replacement from the patients' perspective during the first year post-surgery. Methods: Osteoarthritis patients undergoing primary unilateral total knee or bilateral total knee replacement (TKR) surgery at three Sydney hospitals were eligible. Patients completed questionnaires pre-operatively to record expenses during the previous three months and health status immediately prior to surgery. Patients then maintained detailed prospective cost diaries and completed SF-36 and WOMAC Index each three months for the first post-operative year. Results: Pre-operatively, no significant differences in health status were found between patients undergoing unilateral TKR and bilateral TKR. Both unilateral and bilateral TKR patients showed improvements in pain, stiffness and function from pre-surgery to 12 months post-surgery. Patients who had bilateral TKR spent an average of 12.3 days in acute hospital and patients who had unilateral TKR 13.6 days. Totally uncemented prostheses were used in 6% of unilateral replacements and 48% of bilateral replacements. In hospital, patients who had bilateral TKR experienced significantly more complications, mainly thromboembolic, than patients who had unilateral TKR. Regression analysis showed that for every one point increase in the pre-operative SF-36 physical score (i.e. improving physical status) out-of-pocket costs decreased by 94%. Out-of-pocket costs for female patients were 3.3 times greater than for males. Conclusion: Patients undergoing bilateral TKR and unilateral TKR had a similar length of stay in hospital and similar out-of-pocket expenditures. Bilateral replacement patients reported better physical function and general health with fewer health care visits one year post procedure. Patients requiring bilateral TKR have some additional information to aid their decision making. While their risk of peri-operative complications is higher, they have an excellent chance of good health outcomes at 12 months and are not going to be doubly 'out-of-pocket' for the experience. (C) 2004 OsteoArthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Improving Patients’ Experience and Outcome of Total Joint Replacement: the RESTORE Programme

BACKGROUND: Total hip replacements (THRs) and total knee replacements (TKRs) are common elective procedures. In the REsearch STudies into the ORthopaedic Experience (RESTORE) programme, we explored the care and experiences of patients with osteoarthritis after being listed for THR and TKR up to the time when an optimal outcome should be expected. OBJECTIVE: To undertake a programme of research studies to work towards improving patient outcomes after THR and TKR. METHODS: We used methodologies appropriate to research questions: systematic reviews, qualitative studies, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), feasibility studies, cohort studies and a survey. Research was supported by patient and public involvement. RESULTS: Systematic review of longitudinal studies showed that moderate to severe long-term pain affects about 7–23% of patients after THR and 10–34% after TKR. In our cohort study, 10% of patients with hip replacement and 30% with knee replacement showed no clinically or statistically significant functional improvement. In our review of pain assessment few research studies used measures to capture the incidence, character and impact of long-term pain. Qualitative studies highlighted the importance of support by health and social professionals for patients at different stages of the joint replacement pathway. Our review of longitudinal studies suggested that patients with poorer psychological health, physical function or pain before surgery had poorer long-term outcomes and may benefit from pre-surgical interventions. However, uptake of a pre-operative pain management intervention was low. Although evidence relating to patient outcomes was limited, comorbidities are common and may lead to an increased risk of adverse events, suggesting the possible value of optimising pre-operative management. The evidence base on clinical effectiveness of pre-surgical interventions, occupational therapy and physiotherapy-based rehabilitation relied on small RCTs but suggested short-term benefit. Our feasibility studies showed that definitive trials of occupational therapy before surgery and post-discharge group-based physiotherapy exercise are feasible and acceptable to patients. Randomised trial results and systematic review suggest that patients with THR should receive local anaesthetic infiltration for the management of long-term pain, but in patients receiving TKR it may not provide additional benefit to femoral nerve block. From a NHS and Personal Social Services perspective, local anaesthetic infiltration was a cost-effective treatment in primary THR. In qualitative interviews, patients and health-care professionals recognised the importance of participating in the RCTs. To support future interventions and their evaluation, we conducted a study comparing outcome measures and analysed the RCTs as cohort studies. Analyses highlighted the importance of different methods in treating and assessing hip and knee osteoarthritis. There was an inverse association between radiographic severity of osteoarthritis and pain and function in patients waiting for TKR but no association in THR. Different pain characteristics predicted long-term pain in THR and TKR. Outcomes after joint replacement should be assessed with a patient-reported outcome and a functional test. CONCLUSIONS: The RESTORE programme provides important information to guide the development of interventions to improve long-term outcomes for patients with osteoarthritis receiving THR and TKR. Issues relating to their evaluation and the assessment of patient outcomes are highlighted. Potential interventions at key times in the patient pathway were identified and deserve further study, ultimately in the context of a complex intervention.

Personal perspectives on enablers and barriers to accessing care for hip and knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing demand for joint replacement surgery and other health services for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), barriers and enablers to individual access to care are not well understood. A comprehensive understanding of drivers at all levels is needed to inform efforts for improving access. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore perceived barriers and enablers to receiving conservative (nonsurgical) and surgical treatment for hip and knee OA. DESIGN: This was a qualitative study using directed content analysis. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted, with 33 participants randomly sampled from an Australian population-based survey of hip and knee OA. Each interview covered factors contributing to receiving treatment for OA and perceived barriers to accessing care. Interview transcripts were coded and organized into themes. RESULTS: Key barriers to accessing care for OA included medical opinions about saving surgery for later and the appropriate age for joint replacement. Other common barriers included difficulty obtaining referrals or appointments, long waiting times, work-related issues, and limited availability of primary and specialist care in some areas. Several participants perceived a lack of effective treatment for OA. Private health insurance was the most frequently cited enabler and was perceived to support the costs of surgical and conservative treatments, including physical therapy, while facilitating faster access to surgery. Close proximity to services and assistance from medical professionals in arranging care also were considered enablers. CONCLUSIONS: People with hip or knee OA experience substantial challenges in accessing treatment, and these challenges relate predominantly to health professionals, health systems, and financial factors. Private health insurance was the strongest perceived enabler to accessing care for OA.

Mitigating surgical risk in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty for fractures of the proximal femur

Recently the National Patient Safety Agency in the United Kingdom published a report entitled "Mitigating surgical risk in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty for fractures of the proximal femur". A total of 26 deaths had been reported to them when cement was used at hemiarthroplasty between October 2003 and October 2008. This paper considers the evidence for using cement fixation of a hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of hip fractures.

Clinically indicated replacement versus routine replacement of peripheral venous catheters (Review)

Background Centers for Disease Control Guidelines recommend replacement of peripheral intravenous (IV) catheters every 72 to 96 hours. Routine replacement is thought to reduce the risk of phlebitis and bacteraemia. Catheter insertion is an unpleasant experience for patients and replacement may be unnecessary if the catheter remains functional and there are no signs of inflammation. Costs associated with routine replacement may be considerable. Objectives To assess the effects of removing peripheral IV catheters when clinically indicated compared with removing and re-siting the catheter routinely.

The cost-effectiveness of routine follow-up after primary total hip arthroplasty

Routine postsurgery assessment of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is recommended in many countries. Whether the benefits of this activity are justified by the costs is not known. We used a decision-analytic Markov model to compare the costs and health outcomes of 3 different follow-up strategies after primary THA. If there is no routine follow-up of patients for 7 years after primary THA, there would be cost savings between AU$6.5 and $11.9 million and gains of between 1.8 and 8.8 quality-adjusted life years. Policy makers should investigate less resource-intensive alternatives to common routine postsurgical assessment.