A clinical decision support system in back pain helps to find the diagnosis: a prospective correlation study.

The aim of this study is to show the concordance of an app-based decision support system and the diagnosis given by spinal surgeons in cases of back pain. 86 patients took part within 2 months. They were seen by spine surgeons in the daily routine and then completed an app-based questionnaire that also led to a diagnosis independently. The results showed a Cramer's V = .711 (p < .001), which can be taken as a strong relation between the tool and the diagnosis of the medical doctor. Besides, in 67.4% of the cases, the diagnosis was concordant. An overestimation of the severity of the diagnosis occurred more often than underestimation (15.1% vs. 7%). The app-based tool is a safe tool to support healthcare professionals in back pain diagnosis.

Hospital frailty risk score predicts adverse events in spine surgery.

PURPOSE: The Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) is derived from routinely collected data and validated as a geriatric risk stratification tool. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of the HFRS as a predictor for postoperative adverse events in spine surgery. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis of 2042 patients undergoing spine surgery at a university spine center between 2011 and 2019, HFRS was calculated for each patient. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between the HFRS and postoperative adverse events. Adverse events were compared between patients with high or low frailty risk. RESULTS: Patients with intermediate or high frailty risk showed a higher rate of reoperation (19.7% vs. 12.2%, p < 0.01), surgical site infection (3.4% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001), internal complications (4.1% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.01), Clavien-Dindo IV complications (8.8% vs. 3.4%, p < 0.001) and transfusion (10.9% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed a high HFRS as independent risk factor for reoperation [odds ratio (OR) = 1.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-1.2], transfusion (OR = 1.3; 95% CI 1.2-1.4), internal complications (OR = 1.2; 95% CI 1.1-1.3), surgical site infections (OR = 1.3; 95% CI 1.2-1.5) and other complications (OR = 1.3; 95% CI 1.2-1.4). CONCLUSION: The HFRS can predict adverse events and is an easy instrument, fed from routine hospital data. By identifying risk patients at an early stage, the individual patient risk could be minimized, which leads to less complications and lower costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III - retrospective cohort study TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the local ethics committee (20-1821-104) of the University of Regensburg in February 2020.

Special orthopaedic geriatrics (SOG) - a new multiprofessional care model for elderly patients in elective orthopaedic surgery: a study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial of a multimodal intervention in frail patients with hip and knee replacement.

BACKGROUND: Due to demographic change, the number of older people in Germany and worldwide will continue to rise in the coming decades. As a result, the number of elderly and frail patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty is projected to increase significantly in the coming years. In order to reduce risk of complications and improve postoperative outcome, it can be beneficial to optimally prepare geriatric patients before orthopaedic surgery and to provide perioperative care by a multiprofessional orthogeriatric team. The aim of this comprehensive interventional study is to assess wether multimorbid patients can benefit from the new care model of special orthopaedic geriatrics (SOG) in elective total hip and knee arthroplasty. METHODS: The SOG study is a registered, monocentric, prospective, randomized controlled trial (RCT) funded by the German Federal Joint Committee (GBA). This parallel group RCT with a total of 310 patients is intended to investigate the specially developed multimodal care model for orthogeriatric patients with total hip and knee arthroplasty (intervention group), which already begins preoperatively, in comparison to the usual orthopaedic care without orthogeriatric co-management (control group). Patients ≥70 years of age with multimorbidity or generally patients ≥80 years of age due to increased vulnerability with indication for elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasty can be included in the study. Exclusion criteria are age < 70 years, previous bony surgery or tumor in the area of the joint to be treated, infection and increased need for care (care level ≥ 4). The primary outcome is mobility measured by the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). Secondary outcomes are morbidity, mortality, postoperative complications, delirium, cognition, mood, frailty, (instrumental) activities of daily living, malnutrition, pain, polypharmacy, and patient reported outcome measures. Tertiary outcomes are length of hospital stay, readmission rate, reoperation rate, transfusion rate, and time to rehabilitation. The study data will be collected preoperative, postoperative day 1 to 7, 4 to 6 weeks and 3 months after surgery. DISCUSSION: Studies have shown that orthogeriatric co-management models in the treatment of hip fractures lead to significantly reduced morbidity and mortality rates. However, there are hardly any data available on the elective orthopaedic care of geriatric patients, especially in total hip and knee arthroplasty. In contrast to the care of trauma patients, optimal preoperative intervention is usually possible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00024102. Registered on 19 January 2021.

No Success without Effort: Follow-Up at Six Years after Implementing a Benchmarking and Feedback Concept for Postoperative Pain after Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is still ranked among the operations with the highest postoperative pain scores. Uncontrolled postsurgical pain leads to prolongated hospital stays, causes more frequent adverse reactions and can induce chronical pain syndromes. In 2014, we implemented a standardized, multidisciplinary pain management concept with continuous benchmarking at our tertiary referral center by using the "Quality Improvement in Postoperative Pain Management" (QUIPS) program with excellent results over a period of two years. The initial study ended in 2016 and we aimed to evaluate if it was possible to obtain the excellent short-term results over a period of six years without any extra effort within the daily clinical routine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a retrospective study design, we compared postoperative pain, side effects and functional outcome after primary THA for 2015 and 2021, using validated questionnaires from the QUIPS project. In contrast to the implementation of the pain management concept in 2014, the weekly meetings of the multidisciplinary health care team and special education for nurses were stopped in 2021. Data assessment was performed by an independent pain nurse who was not involved in pain management. RESULTS: Altogether, 491 patients received primary THA in 2015 and 2021 at our tertiary referral center. Collected data revealed significantly worse maximum and activity-related pain (both p < 0.001) in combination with significantly higher opioid consumption in comparison to implementation in 2015. Though the patients reported to be less involved in pain management (p < 0.001), the worse pain scores were not reflected by patient satisfaction which remained high. While the participation rate in this benchmarking program dropped, we still fell behind in terms of maximum and activity-related pain in comparison to 24 clinics. CONCLUSION: Significantly worse pain scores in combination with higher opioid usage and a lower hospital participation rate resemble a reduced awareness in postoperative pain management. The significantly lower patient participation in pain management is in line with the worse pain scores and indirectly highlights the need for special education in pain management. The fact patient satisfaction appeared to remain high and did not differ significantly from 2015, as well as the fact we still achieved an acceptable ranking in comparison to other clinics, highlight the value of the implemented multidisciplinary pain management concept.