A population-based study of ambulatory and surgical services provided by orthopaedic surgeons for musculoskeletal conditions

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The ongoing process of population aging is associated with an increase in prevalence of musculoskeletal conditions with a concomitant increase in the demand of orthopaedic services. Shortages of orthopaedic services have been documented in Canada and elsewhere. This population-based study describes the number of patients seen by orthopaedic surgeons in office and hospital settings to set the scene for the development of strategies that could maximize the availability of orthopaedic resources.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Administrative data from the Ontario Health Insurance Plan and Canadian Institute for Health Information hospital separation databases for the 2005/06 fiscal year were used to identify individuals accessing orthopaedic services in Ontario, Canada. The number of patients with encounters with orthopaedic surgeons, the number of encounters and the number of surgeries carried out by orthopaedic surgeons were estimated according to condition groups, service location, patient's age and sex.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In 2005/06, over 520,000 Ontarians (41 per 1,000 population) had over 1.3 million encounters with orthopaedic surgeons. Of those 86% were ambulatory encounters and 14% were in hospital encounters. The majority of ambulatory encounters were for an injury or related condition (44%) followed by arthritis and related conditions (37%). Osteoarthritis accounted for 16% of all ambulatory encounters. Orthopaedic surgeons carried out over 140,000 surgeries in 2005/06: joint replacement accounted for 25% of all orthopaedic surgeries, whereas closed repair accounted for 16% and reductions accounted for 21%. Half of the orthopaedic surgeries were for arthritis and related conditions.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The large volume of ambulatory care points to the significant contribution of orthopaedic surgeons to the medical management of chronic musculoskeletal conditions including arthritis and injuries. The findings highlight that surgery is only one component of the work of orthopaedic surgeons in the management of these conditions. Policy makers and orthopaedic surgeons need to be creative in developing strategies to accommodate the growing workload of orthopaedic surgeons without sacrificing quality of care of patients with musculoskeletal conditions.</p

The association between comorbidities and pain, physical function and quality of life following hip and knee arthroplasty

The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between comorbidities and pain, physical function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A cross-sectional retrospective survey was conducted including 19 specific comorbidities, administered in patients who underwent THA or TKA in the previous 7–22 months in one of 4 hospitals. Outcome measures included pain, physical functioning, and HRQoL. Of the 521 patients (281 THA and 240 TKA) included, 449 (86 %) had ≥1 comorbidities. The most frequently reported comorbidities (>15 %) were severe back pain; neck/shoulder pain; elbow, wrist or hand pain; hypertension; incontinence of urine; hearing impairment; vision impairment; and cancer. Only the prevalence of cancer was significantly different between THA (n = 38; 14 %) and TKA (n = 52; 22 %) (p = 0.01). The associations between a higher number of comorbidities and worse outcomes were stronger in THA than in TKA. In multivariate analyses including all comorbidities with a prevalence of >5 %, in THA dizziness in combination with falling and severe back pain, and in TKA dizziness in combination with falling, vision impairments, and elbow, wrist or hand pain was associated with worse outcomes in most of the analyses. A broad range of specific comorbidities needs to be taken into account with the interpretation of patients’ health status after THA and TKA. More research including the ascertainment of comorbidities preoperatively is needed, but it is conceivable that in particular, the presence of dizziness with falling, pain in other joints, and vision impairments should be assessed and treated in order to decrease the chance of an unfavorable outcome

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions.

BACKGROUND: Assistive products are items which allow older people and people with disabilities to be able to live a healthy, productive and dignified life. It has been estimated that approximately 1.5% of the world's population need a prosthesis or orthosis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically identify and review the evidence from randomized controlled trials assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions. METHODS: Literature searches, completed in September 2015, were carried out in fourteen databases between years 1995 and 2015. The search results were independently screened by two reviewers. For the purpose of this manuscript, only randomized controlled trials which examined interventions using orthotic or prosthetic devices were selected for data extraction and synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 342 randomised controlled trials were identified (319 English language and 23 non-English language). Only 4 of these randomised controlled trials examined prosthetic interventions and the rest examined orthotic interventions. These orthotic interventions were categorised based on the medical conditions/injuries of the participants. From these studies, this review focused on the medical condition/injuries with the highest number of randomised controlled trials (osteoarthritis, fracture, stroke, carpal tunnel syndrome, plantar fasciitis, anterior cruciate ligament, diabetic foot, rheumatoid and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankle sprain, cerebral palsy, lateral epicondylitis and low back pain). The included articles were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Details of the clinical population examined, the type of orthotic/prosthetic intervention, the comparator/s and the outcome measures were extracted. Effect sizes and odds ratios were calculated for all outcome measures, where possible. CONCLUSIONS: At present, for prosthetic and orthotic interventions, the scientific literature does not provide sufficient high quality research to allow strong conclusions on their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness