Predictive Modeling of Medical and Orthopaedic-Related 90-Day-Readmissions Following Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: As the demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) escalates, 90-day readmissions have emerged as a pressing clinical and economic concern for the current value-based healthcare system. Consequently, healthcare providers have focused on estimating the risk levels of readmitted patients; however, it is unknown if specific factors are associated with different types of complications (i.e., medical or orthopaedic-related) that lead to readmissions. Therefore, this study aimed to: (1) Determine the overall, medical-related, and orthopaedic-related 90-day readmission rate; and (2) Develop a predictive model for risk factors affecting overall, medical-related, and orthopaedic-related 90-day readmissions following TKA. METHODS: A prospective cohort of primary unilateral TKAs performed at a large tertiary academic center in the United States from 2016 to 2020 was included (n = 10,521 patients). Unplanned readmissions were reviewed individually to determine their primary cause, either medical or orthopaedic-related. Orthopaedic-related readmissions were specific complications affecting the joint, prosthesis, or surgical wound. Medical readmissions were due to any other cause requiring medical management. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate associations between pre-specified risk factors and 90-day readmissions, as well as medical/orthopaedic-related readmissions independently. RESULTS: Overall, the rate of 90-day readmissions was 6.7% (n = 704). Over 82% of these readmissions were due to medical-related causes (n = 580), with the remaining 18% being orthopaedic-related (n = 124) readmissions. The AUC for the 90-day readmission model was 0.68 (95% CI [confidence interval]: 0.67 to 0.70). Sex, smoking, length of stay (LOS), and discharge disposition (DD) were associated with orthopaedic readmission, while age, sex, race, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), insurance, surgery day, opioid overdose risk (NARX) score, LOS, and DD were associated with medical-related 90-day readmissions. CONCLUSION: Medical-related readmissions after TKA are more prevalent than orthopaedic-related readmissions. Through successfully constructing and validating multiple 90-day readmission predictive models, we highlight the distinct risk profiles for medical and orthopaedic-related readmissions. This emphasizes the necessity for nuanced, patient-specific risk stratification and preventive measures.

Establishing minimal clinically important differences and patient acceptable symptom state thresholds following birmingham hip resurfacing.

INTRODUCTION: Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) has emerged as a compelling and innovative alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially among young, active patients. However, the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds have not yet been determined for patients undergoing BHR. Therefore, the current study aimed to (1) determine the MCID and PASS thresholds for both the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)-Pain and HOOS physical function shortform (PS), for patients who underwent BHR; and (2) identify factors influencing the achievement of MCID and PASS for HOOS-Pain and HOOS-PS. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from patients undergoing BHR was analyzed. Patients with osteoarthritis and completed preoperative and 1-year postoperative PROMs were included. Distribution-based and anchored-based approaches were used to estimate MCID and PASS, respectively. The optimal cut-off point for PASS thresholds was calculated using the Youden index. RESULTS: MCID for HOOS-Pain and PS were calculated to be 9.2 and 9.3, respectively. The PASS threshold for HOOS-Pain and PS were ≥ 77.7 and ≥ 87.3, respectively. The current study identified several factors affecting postoperative achievement of thresholds. Baseline Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores were a predictor for achieving MCID for postoperative HOOS-Pain, achieving MCID for postoperative HOOS-PS, achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-Pain, and achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-PS. Furthermore, baseline HOOS-Pain was a significant predictor for achieving MCID for postoperative HOOS-PS, achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-Pain, and achieving PASS for postoperative HOOS-PS. CONCLUSIONS: MCID and PASS thresholds were established for HOOS-Pain and PS domains following BHR with most patients achieving these clinically meaningful benchmarks. Additionally, several factors affecting achievement of MCID and PASS were identified, including modifiable risk factors that may allow clinicians to implement optimization strategies and further improve outcomes.

Identifying Critical Evidence Gaps in Wound Closure and Incision Management After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Delphi Panel Insights.

BACKGROUND: Effective surgical wound management in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is crucial for optimal healing and patient outcomes. Despite surgical advances, managing wounds to prevent complications remains challenging. This study aimed to identify and address evidence gaps in TKA wound management, including preoperative optimization, intraoperative options, and postoperative complication avoidance. Addressing these issues is vital for patient recovery and surgical success. METHODS: This study used the Delphi method with 20 experienced orthopedic surgeons from Europe and North America. Conducted from April to September 2023, the process involved three stages: an initial electronic survey, a virtual meeting, and a concluding electronic survey. The panel reviewed and reached a consensus on 26 statements about TKA wound management based on a comprehensive literature review. Additionally, the panel aimed to identify critical evidence gaps in wound management practices. RESULTS: The panel achieved consensus on various wound management practices but highlighted significant evidence gaps. Consensus was reached on wound closure methods, including mesh-adhesive dressings, skin glue, staples, barbed sutures, and negative pressure wound therapy. However, further evidence is needed to address the cost-effectiveness of these methods and develop best practices for patient outcomes. Identifying these gaps highlights the need for more research to improve TKA wound care. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying major evidence gaps underscores the need for targeted research in TKA wound management. Addressing these gaps is crucial for developing effective, efficient, and patient-friendly wound care strategies. Future research should focus on comparative effectiveness studies and developing guidelines for emerging technologies. Bridging these gaps could improve patient outcomes, reduce complications, and enhance TKA surgery success.

How-To Create an Orthopaedic Systematic Review: A Step-by-step Guide Part II: Study Execution.

Systematic reviews are the apex of the evidence-based pyramid, representing the strongest form of evidence synthesizing results from multiple primary studies. In particular, a quantitative systematic review, or meta-analysis, pools results from multiple studies to help answer a respective research question. The aim of this review is to serve as a guide on how to: (1) design, (2) execute, and (3) publish an orthopaedic arthroplasty systematic review. In Part II, we focus on methods to assess data quality through the Cochrane Risk of Bias, Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies criteria, or Newcastle-Ottawa scale; enumerate various methods for appropriate data interpretation and analysis; and summarize how to convert respective findings to a publishable manuscript (providing a previously published example). Use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines is recommended and standard in all scientific literature, including that of orthopedic surgery. Pooled analyses with forest plots and associated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals are common ways to present data. When converting to a manuscript, it is important to consider and discuss the inherent limitations of systematic reviews, including their inclusion and/or exclusion criteria and overall quality, which can be limited based on the quality of individual studies (eg, publication bias, heterogeneity, search/selection bias). We hope our papers will serve as starting points for those interested in performing an orthopaedic arthroplasty systematic review.

Recognizing the Sex Disparity in Surgeons Performing Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is an unambiguous sex disparity in the field of orthopaedic surgery, with women making up only 7.4% of practicing orthopaedic surgeons in 2022. This study seeks to evaluate the sex distribution among orthopaedic surgeons engaged in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between 2013 and 2020, as well as the procedural volume attributed to each provider. METHODS: We retrospectively queried the Medicare dataset to quantify all physicians reporting orthopaedic surgery as their specialty and performing primary TKA from 2013 to 2020. Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes for primary TKA procedures were used to extract associated utilization and billing provider information. Trend analyses were performed with 2-sided correlated Mann-Kendall tests to evaluate trends in the number of surgeons by sex and the women-to-men surgeon ratio. RESULTS: During the study period, 6,198 to 7,189 surgeons billed for primary TKA. Of this number, an average of 2% were women. The mean number of procedures billed for by men was 39.02/y (standard deviation: 34.54), and by women was 28.76/y (standard deviation: 20.62) (P < .001). There was no significant trend in the number of men or women surgeons who billed for primary TKA during the study period. Trend analysis of the women-to-men ratio demonstrated an increasing trend of statistical significance (P = .0187). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant upward trend in the women-to-men ratio of surgeons who billed for primary TKA. However, there remains a colossal gender gap, as women only made up 2.4% of surgeons who billed for the procedure. The current study raises awareness of the notable discrepancy in the average number of TKAs performed by women as compared to men. The orthopaedic community should aim to determine ways to increase the number of women arthroplasty surgeons along with the opportunities that women have to perform TKAs.

Medicare's Post-Acute Care Reimbursement Models as of 2023: Past, Present, and Future.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is continually working to mitigate unnecessary expenditures, particularly in post-acute care (PAC). Medicare reimburses for orthopaedic surgeon services in varied models, including fee-for-service, bundled payments, and merit-based incentive payment systems. The goal of these models is to improve the quality of care, reduce health-care costs, and encourage providers to adopt innovative and efficient health-care practices. This article delves into the implications of each payment model for the field of orthopaedic surgery, highlighting their unique features, incentives, and potential impact in the PAC setting. By considering the historical, current, and future Medicare reimbursement models, we hope to provide an understanding of the optimal payment model based on the specific needs of patients and providers in the PAC setting.

24-Year-Old Patient with Klippel-Trenaunay Syndrome Underwent Cementless Robotic Cruciate-Retaining TKA: A Case Report.

CASE: A 24-year-old man with Klippel-Trenaunay syndrome (KTS) presented with severe knee osteoarthritis unresponsive to conservative measures. Owing to end-stage, debilitating arthritic symptoms, surgery was pursued. Careful preoperative, multidisciplinary planning/treatment included magnetic resonance imaging to characterize the venous malformations throughout the right lower extremity, preoperative sclerotherapy, sirolimus, and robotic-assisted cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA). CONCLUSION: Cementless robotic-assisted TKA with selective patellar resurfacing can be a viable option for young KTS patients with severe osteoarthritis when a meticulous multidisciplinary approach, including sclerotherapy and advanced imaging, is undertaken to analyze vascular abnormalities, minimize surgical risks, preserve bone stock, and optimize outcomes.

Short-term Comparison of Survivorship and Functional Outcomes for Metaphyseal Cones with Short and Long Stems in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Printed porous titanium metaphyseal cones have become a mainstay for managing bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). A short or long stem is routinely used when implanting a cone to augment fixation and offload stresses. This retrospective analysis compared the short-term survivorships and functional outcomes for use of a short or long stem with a metaphyseal cone.A total of 179 cases using metaphyseal cones and stems with median follow-up of 1.95 years (interquartile range, 1.00-2.14) were compared based on stem type. There were 55 cases with long stem(s) and 124 cases with short stem(s). Cases with both long and short stems were excluded. Demographics, Kaplan-Meier survivorships, and preoperative and 1-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs; 2011 Knee Society Score [KSS] objective knee score, function, and satisfaction scores; EuroQol five-dimension scale; and Short Form Survey Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary scores) were compared using t-tests with a significance level of α = 0.05. There were no significant differences in body mass index (mean ± standard deviation) or sex (men [%]) between the short and long stem cohorts (32.3 ± 5.3, 36.3% and 31.5 ± 5.5, 38.2%, respectively; p > 0.05). Patients who had short stems were younger (65.9 ± 8.8 vs. 69.0 ± 9.4, p = 0.0323).Revision-free survivorship for the femoral or tibial component was 100% for long stems and 98.2% for short stems at 1 and 2 years, respectively (log-rank p = 0.6330). The two revisions in the short group were for infection, thus the survivorship for aseptic loosening was 100% at 2 years for both cohorts. There were no significant differences in preoperative or postoperative PROMs.This study demonstrated that highly porous printed metaphyseal cones provided rTKA with excellent early survivorship and similar PROMs whether a short or long stem was used. Additional studies will be needed to discern longer term differences.

Stepping Up Recovery: Integrating Patient-reported Outcome Measures and Wearable Technology for Rehabilitation Following Knee Arthroplasty.

Improvement after knee arthroplasty (KA) is often measured using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, PROMs are limited due to their subjectivity. Therefore, wearable technology is becoming commonly utilized to objectively assess physical activity and function. We assessed the correlation between PROMs and step/stair flight counts in total (TKA) and partial knee arthroplasty (PKA) patients.Analysis of a multicenter, prospective, longitudinal cohort study investigating the collection of average daily step and stair flight counts, was performed. Subjects (N = 1,844 TKA patients and N = 489 PKA patients) completed the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR) and provided numerical rating scale pain scores pre- and postoperatively. Only patients who reported living in a multilevel home environment (N = 896 TKA patients and N = 258 PKA patients) were included in analysis of stair flight counts. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to determine correlations between variables.Among TKA patients, pain scores demonstrated a negative correlation to mean step counts at preoperative (r = -0.14, p < 0.0001) and 1-month follow-up (r = -0.14, p < 0.0001). Similar negative correlations were true for pain and stair flight counts at preoperative (r = -0.16, p < 0.0001) and 1-month follow-up (r = -0.11, p = 0.006). KOOS JR scores demonstrated weak positive correlations with mean step counts at preoperative (r = 0.19, p < 0.0001) and 1-month postoperative (r = 0.17, p < 0.0001). Similar positive correlations were true for KOOS JR scores and stair flight counts preoperatively (r = 0.13, p = 0.0002) and at 1-month postoperatively (r = 0.10, p = 0.0048). For PKA patients, correlations between pain and KOOS JR with step/stair counts demonstrated similar directionality.Given the correlation between wearable-generated data and PROMs, wearable technology may be beneficial in evaluating patient outcomes following KA. By combining subjective feedback with the objective data, health care providers can gain a holistic view of patients' progress and tailor treatment plans accordingly.

Enabling Personalized Medicine in Orthopaedic Surgery Through Artificial Intelligence: A Critical Analysis Review.

¼ The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field of orthopaedic surgery holds potential for revolutionizing health care delivery across 3 crucial domains: (I) personalized prediction of clinical outcomes and adverse events, which may optimize patient selection, surgical planning, and enhance patient safety and outcomes; (II) diagnostic automated and semiautomated imaging analyses, which may reduce time burden and facilitate precise and timely diagnoses; and (III) forecasting of resource utilization, which may reduce health care costs and increase value for patients and institutions.¼ Computer vision is one of the most highly studied areas of AI within orthopaedics, with applications pertaining to fracture classification, identification of the manufacturer and model of prosthetic implants, and surveillance of prosthesis loosening and failure.¼ Prognostic applications of AI within orthopaedics include identifying patients who will likely benefit from a specified treatment, predicting prosthetic implant size, postoperative length of stay, discharge disposition, and surgical complications. Not only may these applications be beneficial to patients but also to institutions and payors because they may inform potential cost expenditure, improve overall hospital efficiency, and help anticipate resource utilization.¼ AI infrastructure development requires institutional financial commitment and a team of clinicians and data scientists with expertise in AI that can complement skill sets and knowledge. Once a team is established and a goal is determined, teams (1) obtain, curate, and label data; (2) establish a reference standard; (3) develop an AI model; (4) evaluate the performance of the AI model; (5) externally validate the model, and (6) reinforce, improve, and evaluate the model's performance until clinical implementation is possible.¼ Understanding the implications of AI in orthopaedics may eventually lead to wide-ranging improvements in patient care. However, AI, while holding tremendous promise, is not without methodological and ethical limitations that are essential to address. First, it is important to ensure external validity of programs before their use in a clinical setting. Investigators should maintain high quality data records and registry surveillance, exercise caution when evaluating others' reported AI applications, and increase transparency of the methodological conduct of current models to improve external validity and avoid propagating bias. By addressing these challenges and responsibly embracing the potential of AI, the medical field may eventually be able to harness its power to improve patient care and outcomes.

Patient satisfaction and patient-reported outcomes do not vary by BMI class in total hip arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Obesity has been identified as a risk factor for postoperative complications in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to investigate patient-reported outcomes, pain, and satisfaction as a function of body mass index (BMI) class in patients undergoing THA. METHODS: 1736 patients within a prospective observational study were categorized into BMI classes. Pre- and postoperative Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS JR), satisfaction, and pain scores were compared by BMI class using one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Healthy weight patients reported the highest preoperative HOOS JR (56.66 ± 13.35) compared to 45.51 ± 14.45 in Class III subjects. Healthy weight and Class III patients reported the lowest (5.65 ± 2.01) and highest (7.06 ± 1.98, p < 0.0001) preoperative pain, respectively. Changes in HOOS JR scores from baseline suggest larger improvements with increasing BMI class, where Class III patients reported an increase of 33.7 ± 15.6 points at 90 days compared to 26.1 ± 17.1 in healthy weight individuals (p = 0.002). Fewer healthy weight patients achieved the minimal clinically important difference (87.4%) for HOOS JR compared to Class II (96.5%) and III (94.7%) obesity groups at 90 days postoperatively. Changes in satisfaction and pain scores were largest in the Class III patients. Overall, no functional outcomes varied by BMI class postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Patients of higher BMI class reported greater improvements following THA. While risk/benefit shared decision-making remains a personalized requirement of THA, this study highlights that utilization of BMI cutoff may not be warranted based on pain and functional improvement.

How to Raise the Bar in the Capture of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: Results from Active and Passive Follow-up Measures.

BACKGROUND: With the upcoming U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2027 policy for mandatory reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA or TKA), it is important to evaluate the resources required to achieve adequate PROM collection and reporting at a clinically relevant rate of follow-up. This study aimed to (1) determine follow-up rates for 1-year PROMs when the follow-up was conducted with active methods (attempted contact by staff) and passive (automated) methods, and (2) evaluate factors associated with higher odds of requiring active follow-up or being lost to follow-up following THA or TKA. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing primary elective THA (n = 7,436) or TKA (n = 10,119) between January 2016 and December 2020 at a single institution were included. The primary outcome was the response rate achieved with active and passive follow-up methods at our institution. Patient characteristics, health-care utilization parameters, PROM values, and patient satisfaction were compared between follow-up methods. RESULTS: Passive and active measures were successful for 38% (2,859) and 40% (3,004) of the THA cohort, respectively, while 21% (1,573) were lost to follow-up. Similarly, passive and active measures were successful for 40% (4,001) and 41% (4,161) of the TKA cohort, respectively, while 20% (2,037) were lost to follow-up. Younger age, male sex, Black or another non-White race, fewer years of education, smoking, Medicare or Medicaid insurance, and specific baseline PROM phenotypes (i.e., with scores in the lower half for pain, function, and/or mental health) were associated with loss to follow-up. Older age, male sex, Black race, and a residence with a higher Area Deprivation Index were associated with requiring active follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: One of 5 patients were lost to follow-up despite active and passive measures following THA or TKA. These patients were more likely to be younger, be male, be of Black or another non-White race, have fewer years of education, be a smoker, have Medicaid insurance, and have specific baseline PROM phenotypes. Innovative strategies aimed at targeting individuals with these baseline characteristics may help raise the bar and increase follow-up while mitigating costs after total joint arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

International Delphi Study on Wound Closure and Incision Management in Joint Arthroplasty Part 2: Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: This modified Delphi study aimed to develop a consensus on optimal wound closure and incision management strategies for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Given the critical nature of wound care and incision management in influencing patient outcomes, this study sought to synthesize evidence-based best practices for wound care in THA procedures. METHODS: An international panel of 20 orthopedic surgeons from Europe, Canada, and the United States evaluated a targeted literature review of 18 statements (14 specific to THA and 4 related to both THA and total knee arthroplasty). There were 3 rounds of anonymous voting per topic using a modified 5-point Likert scale with a predetermined consensus threshold of ≥ 75% agreement necessary for a statement to be accepted. RESULTS: After 3 rounds of voting, consensus was achieved for all 18 statements. Notable recommendations for THA wound management included (1) the use of barbed sutures over non-barbed sutures (shorter closing times and overall cost savings); (2) the use of subcuticular sutures over skin staples (lower risk of superficial infections and higher patient preferences, but longer closing times); (3) the use of mesh-adhesives over silver-impregnated dressings (lower rate of wound complications); (4) for at-risk patients, the use of negative pressure wound therapy over other dressings (lower wound complications and reoperations, as well as fewer dressing changes); and (5) the use of triclosan-coated sutures (lower risk of surgical site infection) over standard sutures. CONCLUSIONS: Through a structured modified Delphi approach, a panel of 20 orthopedic surgeons reached consensus on all 18 statements pertaining to wound closure and incision management in THA. This study provides a foundational framework for establishing evidence-based best practices, aiming to reduce variability in patient outcomes and to enhance the overall quality of care in THA procedures.

Market resilience of orthopaedic hip/knee arthroplasty sales during COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to a marked decrease in elective surgical volume and orthopaedic device sales. The aim of this paper was to quantify this decrease and the related financial impact on the largest hip/knee arthroplasty companies by: (1) tracking individual hip/knee company valuations; (2) calculating aggregate changes in overall hip/knee arthroplasty market valuations; and (3) quantifying quarterly hip/knee revenues relative to prior years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Financial data on the top five hip/knee arthroplasty companies by size between January 1, 2019, and October 1, 2020, was collected from a Wall Street financial database, S&P Capital IQ. Changes in valuation of these companies were compared against benchmark market indices, the S&P500 and Vanguard Healthcare ETF. U.S. hip/knee arthroplasty-specific revenue for Q1 and Q2 of 2019 and 2020 was collected from Securities Exchange Commission 10-Q forms. Quarterly revenue changes were calculated using 1-2Q19 revenues as baselines and aggregate to approximate the overall hip/knee arthroplasty market. RESULTS: The top five hip/knee companies lost $179.2 billion (32.7% loss) in market value from pre COVID-19 market highs to COVID-19 market lows (March 2020), while S&P500 and Vanguard Healthcare ETF decreased 36.1 and 33.2%, respectively. From market lows to October 2020, arthroplasty companies rallied 38.6% while the S&P500 and Vanguard Healthcare ETF regained 43.5 and 56.4% respectively. Notably, this occurred while aggregate 1Q/2Q20 revenue lagged 7.1/41.8% relative to 2019, with an overall decrease of $1.58B (24.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to the overall market and healthcare sector, the top five hip/knee arthroplasty companies have recovered from their COVID market lows. Our results reveal that the valuations of hip/knee companies remained robust during COVID, even as revenues fell, likely due to strong investor confidence in the industry outlook and the greater overall healthcare system utilization.

Outpatient Total Hip Arthroplasty Volume up Nearly 8-Fold After Regulatory Changes With Expanding Demographics and Unchanging Outcomes: A 10-Year Analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the removal of total hip arthroplasty (THA) from the inpatient-only (IPO) lists, the orthopedic landscape across the United States has changed rapidly. Thus, this study aimed to: 1) characterize the change in THA volume for outpatient and inpatient surgeries; 2) elucidate demographical differences before and after removal from the IPO list; and 3) analyze 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for primary THAs between January 2010 and December 2021. The primary outcome was the annual volume of outpatient and inpatient THAs. Secondary outcomes involved 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations. The variables between cohorts were analyzed using goodness-of-fit Chi-square tests with summary statistics. RESULTS: Of the 332,423 THAs between 2010 and 2021, 88% were inpatient THAs (n = 292,974) and 12% were outpatient THAs (n = 39,449). From 2019 to 2021, the volume of inpatient THA decreased by 55% (42,779 to 19,075), while outpatient THA increased by 751% (2,518 to 21,424). Patients who had a THA after 2019 were older (P < .001), more commonly women (P < .001), white (P < .001), and more likely American Society of Anesthesiologists Class III (P < .001). The outpatient cohort had fewer 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations. The length of stay for both cohorts decreased until 2019, before increasing in 2020 and 2021 for inpatient THAs, while home discharge and operative time increased for both. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of outpatient THA increased almost eightfold after its removal from the IPO lists in 2020. Despite expanding eligibility with older patients and more comorbidities, 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations remain low. These findings support the safe transition to outpatient THA with appropriate patient selection and optimization.

What Are the Diagnosis-Specific Thresholds of Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State in Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) pain, physical short form (PS), and joint replacement (JR) 1 year after primary total hip arthroplasty stratified by preoperative diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) versus non-OA. METHODS: A prospective institutional cohort of 5,887 patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (January 2016 to December 2018) was included. There were 4,184 patients (77.0%) who completed a one-year follow-up. Demographics, comorbidities, and baseline and one-year HOOS pain, PS, and JR scores were recorded. Patients were stratified by preoperative diagnosis: OA or non-OA. Minimal detectable change (MDC) and MCIDs were estimated using a distribution-based approach. The PASS values were estimated using an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at one year post surgery. RESULTS: The MCID thresholds were slightly higher in the non-OA cohort versus OA patients. (HOOS-Pain: OA: 8.35 versus non-OA: 8.85 points; HOOS-PS: OA: 9.47 versus non-OA: 9.90 points; and HOOS-JR: OA: 7.76 versus non-OA: 8.46 points). Similarly, all MDC thresholds were consistently higher in the non-OA cohort compared to OA patients. The OA cohort exhibited similar or higher PASS thresholds compared to the non-OA cohort for HOOS-Pain (OA: ≥80.6 versus non-OA: ≥77.5 points), HOOS-PS (OA: ≥83.6 versus non-OA: ≥83.6 points), and HOOS-JR (OA: ≥76.8 versus non-OA: ≥73.5 points). A similar percentage of patients achieved MCID and PASS thresholds regardless of preoperative diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: While MCID and MDC thresholds for all HOOS subdomains were slightly higher among non-OA than OA patients, PASS thresholds for HOOS pain and JR were slightly higher in the OA group. The absolute magnitude of the difference in these thresholds may not be sufficient to cause major clinical differences. However, these subtle differences may have a significant impact when used as indicators of operative success in a population setting.

Are Femoral Stems in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Cost Effective in High Fracture Risk Patients? A Risk Model and Cost Analysis.

Femoral stemmed total knee arthroplasty (FS TKA) may be used in patients deemed higher risk for periprosthetic fracture (PPF) to reduce PPF risk. However, the cost effectiveness of FS TKA has not been defined. Using a risk modeling analysis, we investigate the cost effectiveness of FS in primary TKA compared with the implant cost of revision to distal femoral replacement (DFR) following PPF. A model of risk categories was created representing patients at increasing fracture risk, ranging from 2.5 to 30%. The number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated for each risk category, which was multiplied by the increased cost of FS TKA and compared with the cost of DFR. The 50th percentile implant pricing data for primary TKA, FS TKA, and DFR were identified and used for the analysis. FS TKA resulted in an increased cost of $2,717.83, compared with the increased implant cost of DFR of $27,222.29. At 50% relative risk reduction with FS TKA, the NNT for risk categories of 2.5, 10, 20, and 30% were 80, 20, 10, and 6.67, respectively. At 20% risk, FS TKA times NNT equaled $27,178.30. A 10% absolute risk reduction in fracture risk obtained with FS TKA is needed to achieve cost neutrality with DFR. FS TKA is not cost effective for low fracture risk patients but may be cost effective for patients with fracture risk more than 20%. Further study is needed to better define the quantifiable risk reduction achieved in using FS TKA and identify high-risk PPF patients.

New CMS Policy on the Mandatory Collection of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty by 2027: What Orthopaedic Surgeons Should Know.

ABSTRACT: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has finalized a landmark national policy to standardize and expand the collection and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This policy will be rolled out through phased implementation, beginning with voluntary reporting starting in 2023 and transitioning to mandatory reporting starting in 2025, which will be tied to hospital payment determinations in fiscal year 2028. The overarching goal of this policy is to gather meaningful pre- and postoperative PROM data directly from patients to enhance clinical care, shared decision-making, and quality measurement for these common elective procedures. This national initiative underscores the value of incorporating patient perspectives and priorities into assessments of surgical care quality. For orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals, participating in the initial voluntary reporting period provides an opportunity to integrate PROM collection into clinical workflows and to leverage these data to improve patient care. The achievement of robust PROM response rates and a strong performance on the underlying THA/TKA Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measure may have increasing relevance as payment models shift toward value-based care. The aim of the present forum was to provide an in-depth review of this new CMS policy and key details regarding required PROM instruments, data-collection time frames, and other specifications that surgical teams should understand as they prepare for implementation. The goal was to equip orthopaedic surgeons with actionable information as they embark on this new era of national PROM collection and reporting.

The Mark Coventry Award: PhotothermAA Gel Combined With Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention Significantly Decreases Implant Biofilm Burden and Soft-Tissue Infection in a Rabbit Model of Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: Chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major complication of total joint arthroplasty. The underlying pathogenesis often involves the formation of bacterial biofilm that protects the pathogen from both host immune responses and antibiotics. The gold standard treatment requires implant removal, a procedure that carries associated morbidity and mortality risks. Strategies to preserve the implant while treating PJI are desperately needed. Our group has developed an anti-biofilm treatment, PhotothermAA gel, which has shown complete eradication of 2-week-old mature biofilm in vitro. In this study, we tested the anti-biofilm efficacy and safety of PhotothermAA in vivo when combined with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) in a rabbit model of knee PJI. METHODS: New Zealand white rabbits (n = 21) underwent knee joint arthrotomy, titanium tibial implant insertion, and inoculation with Xen36 (bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus) after capsule closure. At 2 weeks, rabbits underwent sham surgery (n = 6), DAIR (n = 6), or PhotothermAA with DAIR (n = 9) and were sacrificed 2 weeks later to measure implant biofilm burden, soft-tissue infection, and tissue necrosis. RESULTS: The combination of anti-biofilm PhotothermAA with DAIR significantly decreased implant biofilm coverage via scanning electron microscopy compared to DAIR alone (1.8 versus 81.0%; P < .0001). Periprosthetic soft-tissue cultures were significantly decreased in the PhotothermAA with DAIR treatment group (log reduction: Sham 1.6, DAIR 2.0, combination 5.6; P < .0001). Treatment-associated necrosis was absent via gross histology of tissue adjacent to the treatment area (P = .715). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of an anti-biofilm solution like PhotothermAA as a supplement to current treatments that allow implant retention may prove useful in PJI treatment.

Diagnosis-Specific Thresholds of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State for KOOS After Total Knee Arthroplasty.

UPDATE: This article was updated on May 1, 2024 because of a previous error, which was discovered after the preliminary version of the article was posted online. The byline that had read "Ahmed K. Emara, MD 1 *, Ignacio Pasqualini, MD 1 *, Alison K. Klika, MS 1 , Melissa N. Orr, BS 1 , Pedro J. Rullán, MD 1 , Nicolas S. Piuzzi, MD 1 , and the Cleveland Clinic Arthroplasty Group†" now reads "Ahmed K. Emara, MD 1 *, Ignacio Pasqualini, MD 1 *, Yuxuan Jin, MS 1 , Alison K. Klika, MS 1 , Melissa N. Orr, BS 1 , Pedro J. Rullán, MD 1 , Nicolas S. Piuzzi, MD 1 , and the Cleveland Clinic Arthroplasty Group†". BACKGROUND: Literature-reported minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for patient-reported outcome measures demonstrate marked variability. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), MCID, and PASS thresholds for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain subdomain, Physical Function Short Form (PS), and Joint Replacement (JR) among patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: A prospective cohort of 6,778 patients who underwent primary TKA was analyzed. Overall, 1-year follow-up was completed by 5,316 patients for the KOOS Pain, 5,018 patients for the KOOS PS, and 4,033 patients for the KOOS JR. A total of 5,186 patients had an OA diagnosis; this group had an average age of 67.0 years and was 59.9% female and 80.4% White. Diagnosis-specific MDCs and MCIDs were estimated with use of a distribution-based approach. PASS values were estimated with use of an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: The MCID thresholds for the OA group were 7.9 for the KOOS Pain, 8.0 for the KOOS PS, and 6.7 for the KOOS JR. A high percentage of patients achieved the MCID threshold for each outcome measure (KOOS Pain, 95%; KOOS PS, 88%; and KOOS JR, 94%). The MDC 80% to 95% confidence intervals ranged from 9.1 to 14.0 for the KOOS Pain, 9.2 to 14.1 for the KOOS PS, and 7.7 to 11.8 for the KOOS JR. The PASS thresholds for the OA group were 77.7 for the KOOS Pain (achieved by 73% of patients), 70.3 for the KOOS PS (achieved by 68% of patients), and 70.7 for the KOOS JR (achieved by 70% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: The present study provided useful MCID, MDC, and PASS thresholds for the KOOS Pain, PS, and JR for patients with OA. The diagnosis-specific metrics established herein can serve as benchmarks for clinically meaningful postoperative improvement. Future research and quality assessments should utilize these OA-specific thresholds when evaluating outcomes following TKA. Doing so will enable more accurate determinations of operative success and improvements in patient-centered care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.