Effect of Aspirin vs Enoxaparin on Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Undergoing Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: The CRISTAL Randomized Trial.

Importance: There remains a lack of randomized trials investigating aspirin monotherapy for symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Objective: To determine whether aspirin was noninferior to enoxaparin in preventing symptomatic VTE after THA or TKA. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cluster-randomized, crossover, registry-nested trial across 31 hospitals in Australia. Clusters were hospitals performing greater than 250 THA or TKA procedures annually. Patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty procedures were enrolled at each hospital. Patients receiving preoperative anticoagulation or who had a medical contraindication to either study drug were excluded. A total of 9711 eligible patients were enrolled (5675 in the aspirin group and 4036 in the enoxaparin group) between April 20, 2019, and December 18, 2020. Final follow-up occurred on August 14, 2021. Interventions: Hospitals were randomized to administer aspirin (100 mg/d) or enoxaparin (40 mg/d) for 35 days after THA and for 14 days after TKA. Crossover occurred after the patient enrollment target had been met for the first group. All 31 hospitals were initially randomized and 16 crossed over prior to trial cessation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was symptomatic VTE within 90 days, including pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (above or below the knee). The noninferiority margin was 1%. Six secondary outcomes are reported, including death and major bleeding within 90 days. Analyses were performed by randomization group. Results: Enrollment was stopped after an interim analysis determined the stopping rule was met, with 9711 patients (median age, 68 years; 56.8% female) of the prespecified 15 562 enrolled (62%). Of these, 9203 (95%) completed the trial. Within 90 days of surgery, symptomatic VTE occurred in 256 patients, including pulmonary embolism (79 cases), above-knee DVT (18 cases), and below-knee DVT (174 cases). The symptomatic VTE rate in the aspirin group was 3.45% and in the enoxaparin group was 1.82% (estimated difference, 1.97%; 95% CI, 0.54%-3.41%). This failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for aspirin and was significantly superior for enoxaparin (P = .007). Of 6 secondary outcomes, none were significantly better in the enoxaparin group compared with the aspirin group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis, aspirin compared with enoxaparin resulted in a significantly higher rate of symptomatic VTE within 90 days, defined as below- or above-knee DVT or pulmonary embolism. These findings may be informed by a cost-effectiveness analysis. Trial Registration: ANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12618001879257.

Interpreter proxy versus healthcare interpreter for administration of patient surveys following arthroplasty: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries and other systems that conduct routine post-discharge surveillance of patient outcomes following surgery may have difficulty surveying patients who have limited proficiency in the language of the healthcare provider. Interpreter proxies (family and carers) are often used due to limited access to certified healthcare interpreters (due to cost or availability). The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of engaging interpreter proxies compared with certified healthcare interpreters for the administration of patient-reported health-related surveys for people with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHODS: People with LEP and due for a routine 6-month telephone follow-up post knee or hip arthroplasty were invited to participate. Participants were randomly allocated to having their first interview with an interpreter proxy or a certified healthcare interpreter followed by the second (crossover) interview within 2 weeks (range: 4 to 12 days) after the first interview using the alternative method. Agreement between the two methods was assessed using quadratic weighted Cohen's kappa, intraclass correlation and concordance correlation co-efficient where appropriate for EQ-5D health domains, total Oxford hip and knee scores, patient satisfaction, operation success, readmission, reoperation, and post-surgical complication responses. The mean of the differences between the same data items collected by each of the two methods was also calculated. RESULTS: Eighty five participants (96%) completed the study. There was substantial to excellent inter-rater agreement (kappa = 0.69-0.87 and ICCs above 0.74) for all but one measure. The mean differences between family proxy and healthcare interpreter scores for each participant were small, ranging from 0.01 (score range of 1-5) to 0.72 (score range of 0-100). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that using interpreter proxies is a reliable alternative to certified healthcare interpreters in conducting patient-reported health surveys, potentially making this process easier and cost effective for researchers and registries.

The value of inpatient rehabilitation after uncomplicated knee arthroplasty: a propensity score analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in models with or without an inpatient rehabilitation component. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A propensity score-matched cohort of privately insured patients with osteoarthritis who underwent primary, unilateral TKA in one of 12 Australian hospitals between August 2013 and January 2015 were included. Those discharged to an inpatient facility because of poor progress or who experienced significant complications within 90 days of surgery were excluded. INTERVENTION: Discharge after surgery to an inpatient rehabilitation facility or home. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-reported knee pain and function (Oxford Knee Score; at 90 and 365 days after surgery) and health rating (EuroQol "today" health scale; at 35, 90 and 365 days). Inpatient and community-based rehabilitation provider charges were also assessed. RESULTS: 258 patients (129 pairs) from a sample of 332 were matched according to their propensity scores for receiving inpatient rehabilitation; covariates used in the matching included age, sex, body mass index, and markers of health and impairment. The only significant difference in outcomes was that EuroQol health scores were better on Day 35 for patients not undergoing inpatient rehabilitation (median difference, 5; IQR, -10 to 19; P = 0.01). Median rehabilitation provider charges were significantly higher for those discharged to inpatient therapy (total costs: median difference, $9500; IQR, $7000-11 497; P < 0.001; community therapy costs: median difference, $749; IQR, $0-1980; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rehabilitation pathways incorporating inpatient rehabilitation did not achieve better joint-specific outcomes or health scores than alternatives not including inpatient rehabilitation. Given the substantial cost differences, better value alternatives should be considered for patients after uncomplicated TKA.

A systematic review of the diagnostic performance of orthopedic physical examination tests of the hip.

BACKGROUND: Previous reviews of the diagnostic performances of physical tests of the hip in orthopedics have drawn limited conclusions because of the low to moderate quality of primary studies published in the literature. This systematic review aims to build on these reviews by assessing a broad range of hip pathologies, and employing a more selective approach to the inclusion of studies in order to accurately gauge diagnostic performance for the purposes of making recommendations for clinical practice and future research. It specifically identifies tests which demonstrate strong and moderate diagnostic performance. METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Embase Classic and CINAHL was conducted to identify studies of hip tests. Our selection criteria included an analysis of internal and external validity. We reported diagnostic performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios. Likelihood ratios were used to identify tests with strong and moderate diagnostic utility. RESULTS: Only a small proportion of tests reported in the literature have been assessed in methodologically valid primary studies. 16 studies were included in our review, producing 56 independent test-pathology combinations. Two tests demonstrated strong clinical utility, the patellar-pubic percussion test for excluding radiologically occult hip fractures (negative LR 0.05, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.03-0.08) and the hip abduction sign for diagnosing sarcoglycanopathies in patients with known muscular dystrophies (positive LR 34.29, 95% CI 10.97-122.30). Fifteen tests demonstrated moderate diagnostic utility for diagnosing and/or excluding hip fractures, symptomatic osteoarthritis and loosening of components post-total hip arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified a number of tests demonstrating strong and moderate diagnostic performance. These findings must be viewed with caution as there are concerns over the methodological quality of the primary studies from which we have extracted our data. Future studies should recruit larger, representative populations and allow for the construction of complete 2×2 contingency tables.

Effect of Aspirin vs Enoxaparin on 90-Day Mortality in Patients Undergoing Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Secondary Analysis of the CRISTAL Cluster Randomized Trial.

Importance: Ischemic heart disease remains the leading cause of mortality following hip and knee arthroplasty. Due to its antiplatelet and cardioprotective properties, aspirin has been proposed as an agent that could reduce mortality when used as venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis following these procedures. Objective: To compare aspirin with enoxaparin in reducing 90-day mortality for patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study was a planned secondary analysis of the CRISTAL cluster randomized, crossover, registry-nested trial performed across 31 participating hospitals in Australia between April 20, 2019, and December 18, 2020. The aim of the CRISTAL trial was to determine whether aspirin was noninferior to enoxaparin in preventing symptomatic VTE following hip or knee arthroplasty. The primary study restricted the analysis to patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis only. This study includes all adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing any hip or knee arthroplasty procedure at participating sites during the course of the trial. Data were analyzed from June 1 to September 6, 2021. Interventions: Hospitals were randomized to administer all patients oral aspirin (100 mg daily) or subcutaneous enoxaparin (40 mg daily) for 35 days after hip arthroplasty and 14 days after knee arthroplasty procedures. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was mortality within 90 days. The between-group difference in mortality was estimated using cluster summary methods. Results: A total of 23 458 patients from 31 hospitals were included, with 14 156 patients allocated to aspirin (median [IQR] age, 69 [62-77] years; 7984 [56.4%] female) and 9302 patients allocated to enoxaparin (median [IQR] age, 70 [62-77] years; 5277 [56.7%] female). The mortality rate within 90 days of surgery was 1.67% in the aspirin group and 1.53% in the enoxaparin group (estimated difference, 0.04%; 95% CI, -0.05%-0.42%). For the subgroup of 21 148 patients with a nonfracture diagnosis, the mortality rate was 0.49% in the aspirin group and 0.41% in the enoxaparin group (estimated difference, 0.05%; 95% CI, -0.67% to 0.76%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial comparing aspirin with enoxaparin following hip or knee arthroplasty, there was no significant between-group difference in mortality within 90 days when either drug was used for VTE prophylaxis. Trial Registration: http://anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12618001879257.

CRISTAL: protocol for a cluster randomised, crossover, non-inferiority trial of aspirin compared to low molecular weight heparin for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hip or knee arthroplasty, a registry nested study.

INTRODUCTION: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious complication following hip arthroplasty (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA). This study aims to determine whether aspirin is non-inferior to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) in preventing symptomatic VTE following HA and KA. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a cluster randomised, crossover, non-inferiority, trial nested within the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR). The clusters will consist of Australian hospitals performing at least 250 HA and/or KA procedures per annum. All adult patients undergoing HA or KA will be included. The intervention will be aspirin, orally, 85-150 mg daily. The comparator will be LMWH (enoxaparin) 40 mg, subcutaneously, daily. Both drugs will commence within 24 hours postoperatively and continue for 35 days after HA and 14 days after KA. Each hospital will be randomised to commence with aspirin or LMWH and then crossover to the alternative treatment after meeting the recruitment target. Data will be collected through the AOANJRR via patient-reported surveys. The primary outcome is symptomatic VTE within 90 days post surgery, verified by AOANJRR staff. The primary analysis will include only patients undergoing elective primary total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. Secondary outcomes will include symptomatic VTE for all HA and KA (including partial and revision) within 90 days, readmission, reoperation, major bleeding and death within 90 days and reoperation, death and patient-reported pain, function and health status at 6 months. If aspirin is found to be inferior, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted. The study will aim to recruit 15 562 patients from 31 hospitals. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted. Trial results will be submitted for publication. The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12618001879257, pre-results) and is endorsed by the Australia and New Zealand Musculoskeletal Clinical Trials Network.