13 research outputs found
Resuming hip and knee arthroplasty after COVID-19: ethical implications for wellbeing, safety and the economy
Reinstating elective hip and knee arthroplasty services presents significant challenges. We need to be honest about
the scale of the obstacles ahead and realise that the health challenges and economic consequences of the COVID-19
pandemic are potentially devastating.
We must also prepare to make difficult ethical decisions about restarting elective hip and knee arthroplasty. These
decisions should be based on the existing evidence-base, reliable data, the recommendations of experts, and regional
circumstance
Analysis of Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement using the minimally invasive technique in patients aged 60 and above: an independent prospective series
We present the outcome of an independent prospective series of phase-3 Oxford medial mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement surgery. Eight surgeons performed the 154 procedures in a community-based hospital between 1998 and 2003 for patients aged 60 and above. Seventeen knees were revised; in 14 cases a total knee replacement was performed, in 3 cases a component of the unicompartmental knee prosthesis was revised, resulting in a survival rate of 89% during these 2–7 years follow-up interval. This study shows that mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement using a minimally invasive technique is a demanding procedure. The study emphasises the importance of routine in surgical management and strict adherence to indications and operation technique used to reduce outcome failure
Favourable alignment outcomes with MRI-based patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty
Impact of enhanced recovery pathways on safety and efficacy of hip and knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND Over the past decades, clinical pathways (CPs) for hip and knee arthroplasty have been strongly and continuously evolved based on scientific evidence and innovation. AIM The present systematic review, including meta-analysis, aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) with regular pathways for patients with hip and/or knee arthroplasty. METHODS A literature search in healthcare databases (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Web of Science) was conducted from inception up to June 2018. Relevant randomized controlled trials as well as observational studies comparing ERP, based on novel evidence, with regular or standard pathways, prescribing care as usual for hip and/or knee arthroplasty, were included. The effect of both CPs was assessed for (serious) adverse events [(S)AEs], readmission rate, length of hospital stay (LoS), clinician-derived clinical outcomes, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), and financial benefits. If possible, a meta-analysis was performed. In case of considerable heterogeneity among studies, a qualitative analysis was performed. RESULTS Forty studies were eligible for data extraction, 34 in meta-analysis and 40 in qualitative analysis. The total sample size consisted of more than 2 million patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty, with a mean age of 66 years and with 60% of females. The methodological quality of the included studies ranged from average to good. The ERP had lower (S)AEs [relative risk (RR): 0.9, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-1] and readmission rates (RR: 0.8, 95%CI: 0.7-1), and reduced LoS [median days 6.5 (0.3-9.5)], and showed similar or improved outcomes for functional recovery and PROMs compared to regular pathways. The analyses for readmission presented a statistically significant difference in the enhanced recovery pathway in favor of knee arthroplasties (P = 0.01). ERP were reported to be cost effective, and the cost reduction varied largely between studies (€109 and $20573). The overall outcomes of all studies reported using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, presented moderate or high quality of evidence. CONCLUSION This study showed that implementation of ERP resulted in improved clinical and patient related outcomes compared to regular pathways in hip and knee arthroplasty, with a potential reduction of costs