High Risk of Readmission After THA Regardless of Functional Status in Patients Discharged to Skilled Nursing Facility.

BACKGROUND: The postoperative period and subsequent discharge planning are critical in our continued efforts to decrease the risk of complications after THA. Patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) have consistently exhibited higher readmission rates compared with those discharged to home healthcare. This elevated risk has been attributed to several factors but whether readmission is associated with patient functional status is not known. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: After controlling for relevant confounding variables (functional status, age, gender, caregiver support available at home, diagnosis [osteoarthritis (OA) versus non-OA], Charlson comorbidity index [CCI], the Area Deprivation Index [ADI], and insurance), are the odds of 30- and 90-day hospital readmission greater among patients initially discharged to SNFs than among those treated with home healthcare after THA? METHODS: This was a retrospective, comparative study of patients undergoing THA at any of 11 hospitals in a single, large, academic healthcare system between 2017 and 2022 who were discharged to an SNF or home healthcare. During this period, 13,262 patients were included. Patients discharged to SNFs were older (73 ± 11 years versus 65 ± 11 years; p < 0.001), less independent at hospital discharge (6-click score: 16 ± 3.2 versus 22 ± 2.3; p < 0.001), more were women (71% [1279 of 1796] versus 56% [6447 of 11,466]; p < 0.001), insured by Medicare (83% [1497 of 1796] versus 52% [5974 of 11,466]; p < 0.001), living in areas with greater deprivation (30% [533 of 1796] versus 19% [2229 of 11,466]; p < 0.001), and had less assistance available from at-home caregivers (29% [527 of 1796] versus 57% [6484 of 11,466]; p < 0.001). The primary outcomes assessed in this study were 30- and 90-day hospital readmissions. Although the system automatically flags readmissions occurring within 90 days at the various facilities in the overall healthcare system, readmissions occurring outside the system would not be captured. Therefore, we were not able to account for potential differential rates of readmission to external healthcare systems between the groups. However, given the large size and broad geographic coverage of the healthcare system analyzed, we expect the readmissions data captured to be representative of the study population. The focus on a single healthcare system also ensures consistency in readmission identification and reporting across subjects. We evaluated the association between discharge disposition (home healthcare versus SNF) and readmission. Covariates evaluated included age, gender, primary payer, primary diagnosis, CCI, ADI, the availability of at-home caregivers for the patient, and the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) 6-clicks basic mobility score in the hospital. The adjusted relative risk (ARR) of readmission within 30 and 90 days of discharge to SNF (versus home healthcare) was estimated using modified Poisson regression models. RESULTS: After adjusting for the 6-clicks mobility score, age, gender, ADI, OA versus non-OA, living environment, CCI, and insurance, patients discharged to an SNF were more likely to be readmitted within 30 and 90 days compared with home healthcare after THA (ARR 1.46 [95% CI 1.01 to 2.13]; p= 0.046 and ARR 1.57 [95% CI 1.23 to 2.01]; p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients discharged to SNFs after THA had a slightly higher likelihood of hospital readmission within 30 and 90 days compared with those discharged with home healthcare. This difference persisted even after adjusting for relevant factors like functional status, home support, and social determinants of health. These results indicate that for suitable patients, direct home discharge may be a safer and more cost-effective option than SNFs. Clinicians should carefully consider these risks and benefits when making postoperative discharge plans. Policymakers could consider incentives and reforms to improve care transitions and coordination across settings. Further research using robust methods is needed to clarify the reasons for higher SNF readmission rates. Detailed analysis of patient complexity, care processes, and causes of readmission in SNFs versus home health could identify areas for quality improvement. Prospective cohorts or randomized trials would allow stronger conclusions about cause-and-effect. Importantly, no patients should be unfairly "cherry-picked" or "lemon-dropped" based only on readmission risk scores. With proper support and care coordination, even complex patients can have good outcomes. The goal should be providing excellent rehabilitation for all, while continuously improving quality, safety, and value across settings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

High Area Deprivation Index is Associated With Not Achieving the Patient-acceptable Symptom State After TKA.

BACKGROUND: The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) approximates a patient's relative socioeconomic deprivation. The ADI has been associated with increased healthcare use after TKA, but it is unknown whether there is an association with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Given that a high proportion of patients are dissatisfied with their results after TKA, and the large number of these procedures performed, knowledge of factors associated with PROMs may indicate opportunities to provide support to patients who might benefit from it. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Is the ADI associated with achieving the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for pain, Joint Replacement (JR), and Physical Function (PS) short forms after TKA? (2) Is the ADI associated with achieving the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for the KOOS pain, JR, and PS short forms? METHODS: This was a retrospective study of data drawn from a longitudinally maintained database. Between January 2016 and July 2021, a total of 12,239 patients underwent unilateral TKA at a tertiary healthcare center. Of these, 92% (11,213) had available baseline PROM data and were potentially eligible. An additional 21% (2400) of patients were lost before the minimum study follow-up of 1 year or had incomplete data, leaving 79% (8813) for analysis here. The MCID is the smallest change in an outcome score that a patient is likely to perceive as a clinically important improvement, and the PASS refers to the threshold beyond which patients consider their symptoms acceptable and consistent with adequate functioning and well-being. MCIDs were calculated using a distribution-based method. Multivariable logistic regression models were created to investigate the association of ADI with 1-year PROMs while controlling for patient demographic variables. ADI was stratified into quintiles based on their distribution in our sample. Achievement of MCID and PASS thresholds was determined by the improvement between preoperative and 1-year PROMs. RESULTS: After controlling for patient demographic factors, ADI was not associated with an inability to achieve the MCID for the KOOS pain, KOOS PS, or KOOS JR. A higher ADI was independently associated with an increased risk of inability to achieve the PASS for KOOS pain (for example, the odds ratio of those in the ADI category of 83 to 100 compared with those in the 1 to 32 category was 1.34 [95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.58]) and KOOS JR (for example, the OR of those in the ADI category of 83 to 100 compared with those in the 1 the 32 category was 1.29 [95% CI 1.10 to 1.53]), but not KOOS PS (for example, the OR of those in the ADI category of 83 to 100 compared with those in the 1 the 32 category was 1.09 [95% CI 0.92 to 1.29]). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that social and economic factors are associated with patients' perceptions of their overall pain and function after TKA, but such factors are not associated with patients' perceptions of their improvement in symptoms. Patients from areas with higher deprivation may be an at-risk population and could benefit from targeted interventions to improve their perception of their healthcare experience, such as through referrals to nonemergent medical transportation and supporting applications to local care coordination services before proceeding with TKA. Future research should investigate the mechanisms underlying why socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with inability to achieve the PASS, but not the MCID, after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

From Platelet-Rich Plasma to Mesenchymal Stem Cells: Cartilage, Tendon, and Bone Regeneration With Orthobiologics.

The use of orthobiologics such as platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate, and stem cells has been proposed as a biologic augmentation for treatment of various conditions of cartilage, tendon, and bone. Although the published evidence is not conclusive, the safety of these treatments and benefits in improving the biologic condition of treated tissues have been confirmed. Osteoarthritis, rotator cuff injuries, and osteonecrosis of the femoral head are three common musculoskeletal conditions associated with the use of orthobiologics in patients with cartilage, tendon, and bone injuries. When reviewing the use of platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate, and mesenchymal stem cells in patients with these conditions, there is evidence of high safety and positive, but variable, efficacy. Recent studies have shown promising results and have paved the way for research being conducted at many specialized centers around the world.

The Reverse Fragility Index for Mortality End Points in Randomized Trials Comparing Uncemented and Cemented Hemiarthroplasty for Intracapsular Hip Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Interpreting clinical relevance of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is challenging when P-values are marginally above or below the P = .05 threshold. This study examined the robustness of statistically insignificant mortality events from RCTs comparing hemiarthroplasty femoral fixation for displaced intracapsular hip fractures through the reverse fragility index (RFI). METHODS: RCTs were identified using Pubmed, OVID/Medline, and Cochrane databases. Mortality endpoints were stratified into 3 categories: (1) within 30-days, (2) within 90-days, and (3) at latest follow-up. The RFI was derived by manipulating reported mortality events utilizing a contingency table while maintaining a constant number of participants. The reverse fragility quotient (RFQ) was quantified by dividing the RFI by the study sample. RESULTS: Eight RCTs (2,494 participants) were included. The median RFI and RFQ within 30-days was 3.0 (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.0 to 6.0) and 0.016 (IQR: 0.015 to 0.021), suggesting nonsignificant findings were contingent on 1.6 mortality events/100 participants. The median RFI and RFQ within 90-days was 6.0 (IQR: 4.0 to 7.0) and 0.028 (IQR: 0.024 to 0.038), suggesting nonsignificant findings were contingent on 2.8 mortality events/100 participants. At latest follow-up, the median RFI and RFQ was 7.0 (IQR: 6.0 to 12.0) and 0.038 (IQR: 0.029 to 0.054), suggesting nonsignificant findings were contingent on only 3.8 mortality events/100 participants. Median loss to follow-up was 16.0 (IQR: 11.0 to 58.0; 228% greater than RFI), and exceeded the RFI in 6/7(85.7%) studies. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of events (median of 7) was required to convert a statistically nonsignificant finding to one that is significant for the endpoint of mortality. The median loss to follow-up exceeded the median RFI by greater than 200%, suggesting methodological limitations such as patient allocation could alter conclusions.

Despite Greater Improvement in Pain and Function Among Obese Patients Shortly After Total Knee Arthroplasty, There is No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes and Satisfaction Between Body Mass Index Classes at 1 Year Postoperatively.

BACKGROUND: Although obesity may be associated with an increased risk of perioperative and postoperative complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), body mass index (BMI) cutoffs for TKA patient selection remain a controversial topic. This study aimed to investigate patient-reported outcomes, satisfaction, and pain among BMI classes at 3 months and 1 year following TKA. METHODS: A total of 2,365 patients were categorized into Centers for Disease Control BMI classes according to preoperative values. The BMI distribution over the cohort demonstrated 7 underweight, 340 healthy weight, 731 overweight, 666 Class I, 391 Class II, and 230 Class III obesity. Preoperative and postoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR), satisfaction, and pain scores were compared by BMI class by Analysis of Variance with pairwise comparisons. RESULTS: Preoperative KOOS JR scores and satisfaction scores were both significantly greater for healthy weight patients compared to Class III patients (P < .0001). However, KOOS JR, satisfaction, and pain did not vary by BMI class postoperatively. Changes in scores from baseline suggest larger improvements with increasing BMI class, where Class III patients reported the greatest improvements in KOOS JR (23.24 ± 15.67, P < .0001) and pain scores (-3.56 ± 2.65, P < .0001) at 90 days. Significantly greater improvement with increasing BMI was also present at 1-year postoperatively for KOOS JR scores. A total of 85.8% of Class III patients reached the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for KOOS JR at 90 days compared to 76.8% of the healthy weight group (P = .03). Differences between BMI groups in the proportion reaching Minimal Clinically Important Difference at 1 year were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Patients of higher BMI reported greater and earlier improvements in satisfaction, knee function, and pain following TKA. Shared decision-making remains paramount to preoperative surgical evaluation. However, rationing of this surgical intervention based on BMI alone may not be warranted.

A Nationwide Analysis of the Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Complications and Health Care Utilizations After Total Knee Arthroplasty Using the Area Deprivation Index: Consideration of the Disadvantaged Patient.

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status has been demonstrated to be an important prognostic risk factor among patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. We evaluated patients living near neighborhoods with higher socioeconomic risk undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and if they were associated with differences in the following: (1) medical complications; (2) emergency department (ED) utilizations; (3) readmissions; and (4) costs of care. METHODS: A query of a national database from 2010 to 2020 was performed for primary TKAs. The Area Deprivation Index (ADI) is a weighted index comprised of 17 census-based markers of material deprivation and poverty. Higher numbers indicate a greater disadvantage. Patients undergoing TKA in zip codes associated with high ADI (90%+) were 1:1 propensity-matched to a comparison group by age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. This yielded 225,038 total patients, evenly matched between cohorts. Outcomes studied included complications, ED utilizations, readmission rates, and 90-day costs. Logistic regression models computed the odds ratios (OR) of ADI on the dependent variables. P values less than .003 were significant. RESULTS: High ADI led to higher rates and odds of any medical complications (11.7 versus 11.0%; OR: 1.05, P = .0006), respiratory failures (0.4 versus 0.3%; OR: 1.28, P = .001), and acute kidney injuries (1.7 versus 1.5%; OR: 1.15, P < .0001). Despite lower readmission rates (2.9 versus 3.5%), high ADI patients had greater 90-day ED visits (4.2 versus 4.0%; OR: 1.07, P = .0008). The 90-day expenditures ($15,066 versus $12,459; P < .0001) were higher in patients who have a high ADI. CONCLUSIONS: Socioeconomically disadvantaged patients have increased complications and ED utilizations. Neighborhood disadvantage may inform health care policy and improve postdischarge care. The socioeconomic status metrics, including ADI (which captures community effects), should be used to adequately risk-adjust or risk-stratify patients so that access to care for deprived regions and patients is not lost. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

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.

Oxidation and Damage Mechanisms of 2nd Generation Highly Cross-Linked Polyethylene Tibial Inserts.

INTRODUCTION: After clinical introduction in 2005, sequentially annealed, highly crosslinked polyethylene (SA HXLPE) was studied for retrievals with short implantation times; however, long-term follow-ups are lacking. The objective of this study was to examine and compare the revision reasons, damage mechanisms, and oxidation indices (OI) of SA HXLPE and conventional gamma-inert sterilized (Gamma Inert) ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene tibial inserts implanted for > 5 years. METHODS: There were 74 total knee arthroplasty (TKA) tibial inserts (46 SA HXLPEs, 28 Gamma Inerts) implanted for > 5 years (mean 7 ± 2 years) retrieved as part of a multicenter retrieval program. Cruciate-retaining implants comprised 44% of the SA HXLPEs and 14% of the Gamma Inerts. Patient factors and revision reasons were collected from revision operating notes. A semi-quantitative scoring method was used to assess surface damage mechanisms. Oxidation was measured using Fourier transform infrared microscopy according to American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 2102. Differences between cohorts were assessed with Mann-Whitney U-Tests. RESULTS: Loosening (Gamma Inert: 17 of 28, SA HXLPE: 15 of 46) and instability (Gamma Inert: 6 of 28, SA HXLPE: 15 of 46) were the most common revision reasons for both cohorts. The most prevalent surface damage mechanisms were burnishing, pitting, and scratching, with burnishing of the condyles being higher in Gamma Inert components (P = 0.022). Mean oxidation was higher in the SA HXLPE inserts at the articulating surface (P = 0.002) and anterior-posterior (AP) faces (P = 0.023). No difference was observed at the backside surface (P = 0.060). CONCLUSIONS: Revision reasons and surface damage mechanisms were comparable in the Gamma Inert and SA cohorts. Further studies are needed to continue to assess the in vivo damage and clinical relevance, if any, of oxidation in SA HXLPE over longer implantation times, particularly for implants implanted for more than 10 years.

Cannabis Use Following Total Joint Arthroplasty is Associated With Increased Risks? A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the increased legalization of cannabis, a new unknown emerges for orthopaedic surgeons and their patients. This systematic review aimed to (1) evaluate complications of cannabis use; (2) determine the effects of cannabis on pain and opioid consumption; and (3) evaluate healthcare utilizations associated with cannabis use among patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA). METHODS: A systematic review was performed. A search of the literature was performed in 5 databases. We included studies between January 2012 and July 2022 reporting cannabis use and complications, pain management, opioid consumption, length of stay, costs, or functional outcomes following TJA. A meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) and continuous variables was performed. A total of 19 articles were included in our final analysis. RESULTS: Cannabis use was associated with higher odds for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR: 1.46, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.13 to 1.89) and revisions (OR: 1.47 [95% CI: 1.41 to 1.53]) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Cannabis use was associated with similar odds for DVT in total hip arthroplasty (THA) (OR: 1.30 [95% CI: 0.79 to 2.13]), pulmonary embolus in both TKA (OR: 1.29 [95% CI: 0.95 to 1.77]), THA (OR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.09 to 3.28]), and cardiovascular complications in TKA (OR: 1.97 [95% Cl: 0.93 to 4.14]). Cannabis use did not alter pain scores, opioid consumption, or cost of care in THA (estimate: $2,550.51 [95% CI: $356.58 to $5,457.62]) but was associated with higher costs in TKA (estimate: $3,552.46 [95% CI: $1,729.71 to $5,375.22]). There was no difference in lengths of stay or functional outcomes; however, there may be a potentially increased risk for prosthetic complications, pneumonia, and cerebrovascular accidents among cannabis users. CONCLUSION: Cannabis use may be associated with an increased risk of DVTs, revisions, pneumonia, cerebrovascular accidents, and cardiac complications after TJA. Higher-level studies are needed to ascertain the impact of cannabis use for patients undergoing TJA.

Intraincisional Pin Placement is Safe for Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: While robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA) has seen a major increase in its utilization, it requires bone array pins to be fixed into the femur and tibia, which intrinsically carries a risk. As it is currently off-label with some robotic platforms to place pins intraincisional, we aimed to evaluate the safety of intraincisional pin placement during RA-TKAs. METHODS: A prospective cohort of 2,343 patients who underwent RA-TKA at a North American Healthcare System between January 2018 and March 2022 was included. Primary outcomes included periprosthetic fracture or infection (eg, superficial or deep). Secondary outcomes included 1-year reoperation rate due to any cause. Cases were retrospectively reviewed to determine whether complications could be attributed to metaphyseal intraincisional pin placement (4.0 mm pins; two tibial and two femoral). The 90-day follow-up was 100% and the 1-year follow-up rate was 70.6% (n = 1,655). RESULTS: The pin-site related periprosthetic fracture incidence at 90 days was 0.09% (2 out of 2,343). The 90-day infection incidence was 1.4% (superficial: 22; deep: 13). The 1-year reoperation rate was 1.8% (29 out of 1,655). The most common causes of reoperation at 1-year were deep infection (n = 14; 0.83%), superficial infection (n = 3; 0.18%), periprosthetic fracture, mechanical symptoms, instability, and hematoma (n = 2; 0.12% for each). CONCLUSIONS: One in 1,172 patients may experience a pin-related periprosthetic fracture after RA-TKA with intraincisional bone array pin placement. There was a low 90-day infection incidence and reoperations within 1-year after RA-TKA were rare.

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.

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

BACKGROUND: The rate of unplanned hospital readmissions following total hip arthroplasty (THA) varies from 3 to 10%, representing a major economic burden. However, it is unknown if specific factors are associated with different types of complications (ie, 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 THA. METHODS: A prospective cohort of primary unilateral THAs performed at a large tertiary academic center in the United States from 2016 to 2020 was included (n = 8,893 patients) using a validated institutional data collection system. Orthopaedic-related readmissions were specific complications affecting the prosthesis, joint, and surgical wound. Medical readmissions were due to any other cause requiring medical management. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate associations between prespecified risk factors and 90-day readmissions, as well as medical and orthopaedic-related readmissions independently. RESULTS: Overall, the rate of 90-day readmissions was 5.6%. Medical readmissions (4.2%) were found to be more prevalent than orthopaedic-related readmissions (1.4%). The area under the curve for the 90-day readmission model was 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.69 to 0.74). Factors significantly associated with medical-related readmissions were advanced age, Black race, education, Charlson Comorbidity Index, surgical approach, opioid overdose risk score, and nonhome discharge. In contrast, risk factors linked to orthopaedic-related readmissions encompassed body mass index, patient-reported outcome measure phenotype, nonosteoarthritis indication, opioid overdose risk, and nonhome discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Of the overall 90-day readmissions following primary THA, 75% were due to medical-related complications. Our successful predictive model for complication-specific 90-day readmissions highlights how different risk factors may disproportionately influence medical versus orthopaedic-related readmissions, suggesting that patient-specific, tailored preventive measures could reduce postoperative readmissions in the current value-based health care setting.

How-To Create an Orthopaedic Systematic Review: A Step-by-Step Guide Part I: Study Design.

Systematic reviews are conducted through a consistent and reproducible method to search, appraise, and summarize information. Within the evidence-based pyramid, systematic reviews can be at the apex when incorporating high-quality studies, presenting the strongest form of evidence given their synthesis of results from multiple primary studies to level IV evidence, depending on the studies they incorporate. When combined and supplemented with a meta-analysis using statistical methods to pool the results of 3 or more studies, systematic reviews are powerful tools to help answer research questions. 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 and meta-analysis. In Part I, we discuss how to develop an appropriate research question as well as source and screen databases. To date, commonly used databases to source studies include PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science. Although not all-encompassing, this paper serves as a starting point for those interested in performing and/or critically reviewing lower extremity arthroplasty systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

How-To Create an Orthopaedic Systematic Review: A Step-by-Step Guide. Part III: Executing a Meta-Analysis.

At the top of the evidence-based pyramid, systematic reviews stand out as the most powerful, synthesizing findings from numerous primary studies. Specifically, a quantitative systematic review, known as a meta-analysis, combines results from various studies to address a specific research question. This review serves as a guide on how to: (1) design; (2) perform; and (3) publish an orthopedic arthroplasty systematic review. In Part III, we focus on how to design and perform a meta-analysis. We delineate the advantages and disadvantages of meta-analyses compared to systematic reviews, acknowledging their potential challenges due to time constraints and the complexities posed by study heterogeneity and data availability. Despite these obstacles, a well-executed meta-analysis contributes precision and heightened statistical power, standing at the apex of the evidence-based pyramid. The design of a meta-analysis closely mirrors that of a systematic review, but necessitates the inclusion of effect sizes, variability measures, sample sizes, outcome measures, and overall study characteristics. Effective data presentation involves the use of forest plots, along with analyses for heterogeneities and subgroups. Widely-used software tools are common in this domain, and there is a growing trend toward incorporating artificial intelligence software. Ultimately, the intention is for these papers to act as foundational resources for individuals interested in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the context of orthopaedic arthroplasty, where applicable.

Safety Profile of Seven-Day Intra-articular Antibiotic Irrigation for the Treatment of Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Prospective Randomized Phase II Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Systemic intravenous antimicrobials yield poor outcomes during treatment of periprosthetic joint infection due to the inability to obtain minimum biofilm eradication concentrations. This study evaluated the safety of a novel method of optimized local delivery of intra-articular antibiotics (IAAs). METHODS: This was a Phase II, multicenter, prospective randomized trial evaluating safety of a rapid (seven-day) two-stage exchange arthroplasty with IAA irrigation compared to standard two-stage exchange. The Experimental Group received irrigation using 80 mg tobramycin daily with a 2-hour soak, followed by hourly irrigation using 125 mg vancomycin with a 30-minute soak via an intramedullary irrigation device. The Control Group received an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer with vancomycin (average 8.4 g) and tobramycin (average 7.1 g, total 16 g antibiotics). Both groups received 12 weeks of systemic antibiotics following Stage 2. Safety measures included adverse events, peak vancomycin/tobramycin serum concentrations (Experimental Group), blood transfusion, and mortality. There were thirty-seven patients randomized to the Experimental Group and 39 to control. There was no difference in baseline demographics or comorbidities. RESULTS: There were no antibiotic medication-related adverse events and 2 serious adverse events related to antibiotic instillation. Of 188 vancomycin peak measurements, 69% had detectable serum level concentrations, with all concentrations well below the maximum acceptable trough threshold of 20 µg/mL. Of the 103 tobramycin peak measurements, 45% had detectable levels, with all below the maximum acceptable peak threshold of 18 to 24 µg/mL. There was no difference in blood transfused per subject (Experimental: 655 mL versus Control: 792 mL; P = .4188). There were two (2) deaths in the Experimental Group and four (4) in the control. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IAA is safe with minimal systemic antibiotic exposure. There was no difference in the rates or severity of serious adverse events between groups. Further research is being conducted to examine treatment efficacy.

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.

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.

Does Your Patient Need to Lose Weight? Weight Change Before and After Total Hip Arthroplasty Does Not Affect Health Care Utilization and Achievement of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference.

BACKGROUND: Despite the potential negative impact of preoperative obesity on total hip arthroplasty (THA) outcomes, the association between preoperative and postoperative weight change and outcomes is much less understood. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the impact of preoperative and postoperative weight change and preoperative body mass index (BMI) on health care utilization, satisfaction, and achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short-Form (HOOS PS) and HOOS Pain. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary elective unilateral THA between January 2016 and December 2019 were included (N = 2,868). Multivariable logistic regression assessed the association between BMI and preoperative and postoperative weight change on outcomes while controlling for demographic characteristics. RESULTS: There was no association between preoperative weight change and prolonged length of stay (> 3 days), 90-day readmission, nonhome discharge, patient dissatisfaction at 1 year, or achievement of HOOS Pain or HOOS PS MCID. Postoperative weight loss was an independent risk factor for patient dissatisfaction at 1 year but was not associated with achievement of either HOOS Pain or HOOS PS MCID at 1-year postoperative. Preoperative obesity classes I to III were independent risk factors for nonhome discharge. Nevertheless, preoperative obesity class I and class II were associated with an increased probability of reaching HOOS Pain MCID. Preoperative BMI was not associated with an increased risk of patient dissatisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative weight change does not appear to influence health care utilization, satisfaction, or achievement of MCID in pain and function following THA. Postoperative weight loss may play a role as a risk factor for dissatisfaction following THA. Additionally, patients who had a higher baseline BMI may be more likely to see improvement in pain following THA. Therefore, when counseling obese patients for THA, surgeons must balance the risk of perioperative complications with the expectation of greater improvements in pain.

Assessing Ability for ChatGPT to Answer Total Knee Arthroplasty-Related Questions.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence in the field of orthopaedics has been a topic of increasing interest and opportunity in recent years. Its applications are widespread both for physicians and patients, including use in clinical decision-making, in the operating room, and in research. In this study, we aimed to assess the quality of ChatGPT answers when asked questions related to total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: ChatGPT prompts were created by turning 15 of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines into questions. An online survey was created, which included screenshots of each prompt and answers to the 15 questions. Surgeons were asked to grade ChatGPT answers from 1 to 5 based on their characteristics: (1) relevance, (2) accuracy, (3) clarity, (4) completeness, (5) evidence-based, and (6) consistency. There were 11 Adult Joint Reconstruction fellowship-trained surgeons who completed the survey. Questions were subclassified based on the subject of the prompt: (1) risk factors, (2) implant/intraoperative, and (3) pain/functional outcomes. The average and standard deviation for all answers, as well as for each subgroup, were calculated. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) was also calculated. RESULTS: All answer characteristics were graded as being above average (ie, a score > 3). Relevance demonstrated the highest scores (4.43 ± 0.77) by surgeons surveyed, and consistency demonstrated the lowest scores (3.54 ± 1.10). ChatGPT prompts in the Risk Factors group demonstrated the best responses, while those in the Pain/Functional Outcome group demonstrated the lowest. The overall IRR was found to be 0.33 (poor reliability), with the highest IRR for relevance (0.43) and the lowest for evidence-based (0.28). CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT can answer questions regarding well-established clinical guidelines in total knee arthroplasty with above-average accuracy but demonstrates variable reliability. This investigation is the first step in understanding large language model artificial intelligence like ChatGPT and how well they perform in the field of arthroplasty.