scholarly journals Obesity and revision surgery, mortality, and patient-reported outcomes after primary knee replacement surgery in the National Joint Registry: A UK cohort study

PLoS Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. e1003704
Author(s):  
Jonathan Thomas Evans ◽  
Sofia Mouchti ◽  
Ashley William Blom ◽  
Jeremy Mark Wilkinson ◽  
Michael Richard Whitehouse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
National Joint Registry ◽  
Joint Registry ◽  
Obese Class ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Surgery Mortality ◽  
High Bmi

Background One in 10 people in the United Kingdom will need a total knee replacement (TKR) during their lifetime. Access to this life-changing operation has recently been restricted based on body mass index (BMI) due to belief that high BMI may lead to poorer outcomes. We investigated the associations between BMI and revision surgery, mortality, and pain/function using what we believe to be the world’s largest joint replacement registry. Methods and findings We analysed 493,710 TKRs in the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man from 2005 to 2016 to investigate 90-day mortality and 10-year cumulative revision. Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) databases were linked to the NJR to investigate change in Oxford Knee Score (OKS) 6 months postoperatively. After adjustment for age, sex, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, indication for operation, year of primary TKR, and fixation type, patients with high BMI were more likely to undergo revision surgery within 10 years compared to those with “normal” BMI (obese class II hazard ratio (HR) 1.21, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.32 (p < 0.001) and obese class III HR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.26 (p = 0.026)). All BMI classes had revision estimates within the recognised 10-year benchmark of 5%. Overweight and obese class I patients had lower mortality than patients with “normal” BMI (HR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.90 (p = 0.001) and HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.82 (p < 0.001)). All BMI categories saw absolute increases in OKS after 6 months (range 18–20 points). The relative improvement in OKS was lower in overweight and obese patients than those with “normal” BMI, but the difference was below the minimal detectable change (MDC; 4 points). The main limitations were missing BMI particularly in the early years of data collection and a potential selection bias effect of surgeons selecting the fitter patients with raised BMI for surgery. Conclusions Given revision estimates in all BMI groups below the recognised threshold, no evidence of increased mortality, and difference in change in OKS below the MDC, this large national registry shows no evidence of poorer outcomes in patients with high BMI. This study does not support rationing of TKR based on increased BMI.

Trust compliance with best practice tariff criteria for total hip and knee replacement

2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (9) ◽  
pp. 537-540
Author(s):  
Ivor Vanhegan ◽  
Andrew Sankey ◽  
Warwick Radford ◽  
Simon Ball ◽  
Charles Gibbons
Keyword(s):  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Participation Rate ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measure Data ◽  
National Joint Registry ◽  
Joint Registry ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measure ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Satisfaction of the best practice tariff criteria for primary hip and knee replacement enables on average an additional £560 of reimbursement per case. The Getting it Right First Time report highlighted poor awareness of these criteria among orthopaedic departments. Methods: The authors investigated the reasons for non-compliance with the best practice tariff criteria at their trust and implemented a quality improvement approach to ensure successful adherence to the standards (a minimum National Joint Registry compliance rate of 85%, a National Joint Registry unknown consent rate below 15%, a patient-reported outcome measure participation rate of ≥50%, and an average health gain not significantly below the national average). This was investigated using quarterly online reports from the National Joint Registry and NHS Digital. Results: Initially, the trust had a 31% patient-reported outcome measures participation rate arising from a systematic error in the submission of preoperative patient-reported outcome measure scores. Re-audit following the resubmission of patient-reported outcome measure data under the trust's correct organization data service code confirmed an improvement in patient-reported outcome measure compliance to 90% and satisfaction of all criteria resulting in over £450 000 of additional reimbursement to the trust. Conclusions: The authors would urge others to review their compliance with these four best practice tariff criteria to ensure that they too are not missing out on this significant reimbursement sum.

Hip and knee arthroplasty

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-27
Author(s):  
Dominic Marley ◽  
Nomaan Sheikh ◽  
John Taylor ◽  
Amit Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Knee Pain ◽  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Knee Arthroplasty ◽  
National Joint Registry ◽  
Knee Replacement Surgery ◽  
Joint Registry ◽  
Replacement Surgery ◽  
Knee Replacements ◽  
Hip And Knee Arthroplasty

The incidence of hip and knee replacement surgery has risen dramatically in recent years. The latest National Joint Registry figures indicate that almost 190 000 total hip and knee replacements were performed in 2015. The aim of this article is to discuss the management of hip and knee pain in primary care, the indications for hip and knee arthroplasty and surgical considerations.

scholarly journals A comparison of comorbidity measures for predicting mortality after elective hip and knee replacement: A cohort study of data from the National Joint Registry in England and Wales

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255602
Author(s):  
Chris M. Penfold ◽  
Michael R. Whitehouse ◽  
Ashley W. Blom ◽  
Andrew Judge ◽  
J. Mark Wilkinson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Additional Patient ◽  
National Joint Registry ◽  
Comorbidity Score ◽  
Primary Operation ◽  
Joint Registry ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Knee Replacements ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
Comorbidity Scores

Background The risk of mortality following elective total hip (THR) and knee replacements (KR) may be influenced by patients’ pre-existing comorbidities. There are a variety of scores derived from individual comorbidities that can be used in an attempt to quantify this. The aims of this study were to a) identify which comorbidity score best predicts risk of mortality within 90 days or b) determine which comorbidity score best predicts risk of mortality at other relevant timepoints (30, 45, 120 and 365 days). Patients and methods We linked data from the National Joint Registry (NJR) on primary elective hip and knee replacements performed between 2011–2015 with pre-existing conditions recorded in the Hospital Episodes Statistics. We derived comorbidity scores (Charlson Comorbidity Index—CCI, Elixhauser, Hospital Frailty Risk Score—HFRS). We used binary logistic regression models of all-cause mortality within 90-days and within 30, 45, 120 and 365-days of the primary operation using, adjusted for age and gender. We compared the performance of these models in predicting all-cause mortality using the area under the Receiver-operator characteristics curve (AUROC) and the Index of Prediction Accuracy (IPA). Results We included 276,594 elective primary THRs and 338,287 elective primary KRs for any indication. Mortality within 90-days was 0.34% (N = 939) after THR and 0.26% (N = 865) after KR. The AUROC for the CCI and Elixhauser scores in models of mortality ranged from 0.78–0.81 after THR and KR, which slightly outperformed models with ASA grade (AUROC = 0.77–0.78). HFRS performed similarly to ASA grade (AUROC = 0.76–0.78). The inclusion of comorbidities prior to the primary operation offers no improvement beyond models with comorbidities at the time of the primary. The discriminative ability of all prediction models was best for mortality within 30 days and worst for mortality within 365 days. Conclusions Comorbidity scores add little improvement beyond simpler models with age, gender and ASA grade for predicting mortality within one year after elective hip or knee replacement. The additional patient-specific information required to construct comorbidity scores must be balanced against their prediction gain when considering their utility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document