Discharge to inpatient rehabilitation following arthroplasty is a strong predictor of persistent opioid use 90 days after surgery: a prospective, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Total knee and hip arthroplasty are considered a clinically and cost-effective intervention, however, persistent pain post-surgery can occur, and some continue to take opioid medications long-term. One factor which has infrequently been included in prediction modelling is rehabilitation pathway, in particular, one which includes inpatient rehabilitation. As discharge to inpatient rehabilitation post-arthroplasty is common practice, we aimed to identify whether rehabilitation pathway (discharge to in-patient rehabilitation or not) predicts continued use of opioids at 3 months (90 days) post- total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) whilst controlling for other covariates. METHODS: The study was nested within a prospective observational study capturing pre-operative, acute care and longer-term data from 1900 osteoarthritis (OA) patients who underwent primary TKA or THA. The larger study involved a part-random, part-convenience sample of 19 high-volume hospitals across Australia. Records with complete pre-and post-operative analgesic (35 days and 90 days) use were identified [1771 records (93% of sample)] and included in logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirteen people (17.8%) reported ongoing opioid use at 90 days post-operatively. In the adjusted model, admission to inpatient rehabilitation after surgery was identified as an independent and significant predictor of opioid use at 90-days. Inpatient rehabilitation was associated with almost twice the odds of persistent opioid use at 90-days compared to discharge directly home (OR = 1.9 (1.4, 2.5), p < .001). CONCLUSION: The inpatient rehabilitation pathway is a strong predictor of longer-term opioid use (90 days) post-arthroplasty, accounting for many known and possible confounders of use including sex, age, insurance status, major complications, smoking status and baseline body pain levels. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was nested within a prospective cohort observational study capturing pre-operative, acute-care and longer-term data from patients undergoing primary TKA or THA for osteoarthritis (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01899443).

Effectiveness of Oxycodone Hydrochloride (Strong Opioid) vs Combination Acetaminophen and Codeine (Mild Opioid) for Subacute Pain After Fractures Managed Surgically: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with a surgically managed fracture are commonly discharged from the hospital with a strong opioid prescription, but limited evidence exists to support this practice. Objective: To test the hypothesis that strong opioids provide greater analgesia than mild opioids over the first week postdischarge from hospital after fracture surgical treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: This double-blind, superiority, randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single-center, major trauma hospital in Sydney, Australia. Participants were inpatients who had sustained an acute nonpathological facture of a long bone or the pelvis, patella, calcaneus, or talus who were treated with surgical fixation and enrolled from July 27, 2016, to August 22, 2017. Data were analyzed from June through October 2018. Interventions: Initiation at discharge of oxycodone hydrochloride 5 mg of 10 mg (ie, 1 or 2 tablets) or combination acetaminophen and codeine 500 mg and 8 mg or 1000 mg and 16 mg (ie, 1 or 2 tablets) 4 times daily for a maximum duration of 3 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the mean of daily pain scores collected during week 1 of treatment measured using the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS). Participants were asked to rate their mean pain over the previous 24 hours daily using an NRS score from 0 to 10, with 0 representing no pain and 10 representing the worst pain imaginable. The key secondary outcomes were EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) responses, worst pain, medication adverse events, global perceived effect, and return to work. Results: A total of 120 patients with 1 or more acute orthopedic fractures requiring surgical fixation were randomized, including 59 patients in the strong-opioid group (43 [72.9%] men; mean [SD] age, 36.0 [14.1] years; mean oral morphine equivalent for days 1-7 of 32.9 mg) and 61 patients in the mild opioid group (47 [77.1%] men; mean [SD] age, 38.2 [13.5] years; mean oral morphine equivalent for days 1-7 of 5.5 mg). From days 1 to 7 postdischarge, the mean daily NRS mean pain score was 4.04 (95% Cl, 3.67 to 4.41) in the strong opioid group and 4.54 (95% Cl, 4.17 to 4.90) in the mild opioid group. The between-group difference of the primary outcome was not statistically significant (-0.50 [95% Cl, -1.11 to 0.12]; P = .11) despite a 6-fold increased dose of opioids being delivered in the strong opioid group. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that treatment with strong opioid medication subacutely was not superior to treatment with milder medication for treatment of pain among patients with surgically managed orthopedic fractures. These findings suggest that ongoing first-line strong opioid use after discharge from the hospital should not be supported. Trial Registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry No.: ACTRN12616000941460.

Tibial rotation kinematics subsequent to knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The use of computer assisted joint replacement has facilitated precise intraoperative measurement of knee kinematics. The changes in "screw home mechanism" (SHM) resulting from Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) with different prostheses and constraints has not yet been accurately described. METHODS: A pilot study was first completed. Intraoperative kinematic data was collected two groups of 15 patients receiving different prostheses. RESULTS: On average, patients lost 5.3° of ER (SD = 6.1°). There was no significant difference between the prostheses or different prosthetic constraints. CONCLUSIONS: There significant loss of SHM after TKA. Further research is required to understand its impact on patient function.

The Australian arthroplasty thromboprophylaxis survey.

Previous surveys of orthopedic surgeons have shown considerable variation in thromboprophylaxis for venous thromboembolism after joint arthroplasty. This survey aimed to determine the current practice among Australian orthopedic surgeons. A questionnaire regarding the duration, reasons, and methods of chemical and mechanical prophylaxis for hip and knee arthroplasty patients was sent to the 1082 surgeons identified; 593 (55%) members completed the questionnaire. The survey revealed that 98% of surgeons used chemical thromboprophylaxis, mainly low-molecular-weight heparin (84% hip and 79% knee). Those who use low-molecular-weight heparin were more likely to prescribe anticoagulants in fear of litigation (19.2% vs 10.1%, P = .04) and more likely to rely on protocols or guidelines (32.2% vs 17.2%, P = .004) instead of basing their decision on their own reading (52.4% vs 71.3%, P = .001). Most orthopedic surgeons in our survey have indicated that they would welcome guidelines from their association or college regarding thromboprophylaxis in arthroplasty.