Protocol for a multicenter study on effectiveness and economics of the Back At work After Surgery (BAAS): a clinical pathway for knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Optimizing return to work (RTW) after knee arthroplasty (KA) is becoming increasingly important due to a growing incidence of KA and poor RTW outcomes after KA. We developed the Back At work After Surgery (BAAS) clinical pathway for optimized RTW after KA. Since the effectiveness and cost analysis of the BAAS clinical pathway are still unknown, analysis on effectiveness and costs of BAAS is imperative. METHOD: This protocol paper has been written in line with the standards of Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trails. To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for RTW, we will perform a multicenter prospective cohort study with patients who decided to receive a total KA (TKA) or an unicompartmental KA (UKA). To evaluate the effectiveness of BAAS regarding RTW, a comparison to usual care will be made using individual patient data on RTW from prospectively performed cohort studies in the Netherlands. DISCUSSION: One of the strengths of this study is that the feasibility for the BAAS clinical pathway was tested at first hand. Also, we will use validated questionnaires and functional tests to assess the patient's recovery using robust outcomes. Moreover, the intervention was performed in two hospitals serving the targeted patient group and to reduce selection bias and improve generalizability. The limitations of this study protocol are that the lead author has an active role as a medical case manager (MCM) in one of the hospitals. Additionally, we will use the data from other prospective Dutch cohort studies to compare our findings regarding RTW to usual care. Since we will not perform an RCT, we will use propensity analysis to reduce the bias due to possible differences between these cohorts. TRAIL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrails.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05690347 , date of first registration: 19-01-2023).

Implementation of back at work after surgery (BAAS): A feasibility study of an integrated pathway for improved return to work after knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Optimizing return to work after knee arthroplasty is becoming more important because of the growing incidence of KA among workers and poor return to work outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility of Back At work After Surgery (BAAS): an integrated clinical pathway for return to work after knee arthroplasty. METHOD: Working patients who received unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between January 2021 and November 2021, younger than 65 years and motivated to return to work were eligible to participate. Feasibility was investigated on five domains: reach, dose delivered, dose received, fidelity and patients' attitudes. These outcomes were obtained by a patient-reported questionnaire and an interview with the occupational case manager and medical case manager. RESULTS: Of the eligible 29 patients, eleven were willing to participate (response rate 38%; due to travel distance to and from the hospital). The dose delivered was between 91 and 100%, except information given about return to work from the orthopedic surgeon which was 18%. The dose received was 100%. For fidelity, case managers reported nine shortcomings for which five solutions were mentioned. In terms of patients' attitude, all patients were satisfied and one patient mentioned an improvement. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of reach, participation was low: only 29%. The BAAS clinical pathway seems feasible based on dose delivered, dose received, fidelity and patient attitudes. The next step is to assess the effectiveness of the BAAS clinical pathway for return to work.

Successful treatment of Scedosporium aurantiacum osteomyelitis in an immunocompetent patient.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial infections are a well-known complication of traumatic amputations. In cases involving contact with soil or water contaminated with manure, one also must be aware of infections with fungi, particularly Scedosporium spp. We report on an immunocompetent trauma patient with an infection caused by a recently described Scedosporium species, S. aurantiacum. METHODS: Case report and literature review. RESULTS: In a 36-year-old healthy man, entrapment of the right leg resulted in a traumatic amputation just below the knee and contamination of the wound with manure. Six weeks after the initial surgical debridement, he developed a phlegmon. Cultures yielded Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and treatment with ciprofloxacin and clindamycin was started. After several weeks, a fistula developed, and roentgenograms demonstrated osteomyelitis. A pure culture of Scedosporium was grown from bone fragments and was identified as S. aurantiacum by sequencing of the rDNA internal transcribed spacer 1 region. Following debridement, the wound was drenched in 0.2% polyhexamethylene biguanide for four minutes. A pre-operative culture showed growth of S. aureus only. Postoperatively, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, and voriconazole were started and continued for 12 weeks. At the last follow-up, 15 months after the trauma and nine months after cessation of the antimicrobial agents, the patient had no signs of osteomyelitis. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first case of osteomyelitis caused by S. aurantiacum. The patient was treated successfully by a combination of surgery and voriconazole.

Phantom pain and phantom sensations in upper limb amputees: an epidemiological study.

Phantom pain in subjects with an amputated limb is a well-known problem. However, estimates of the prevalence of phantom pain differ considerably in the literature. Various factors associated with phantom pain have been described including pain before the amputation, gender, dominance, and time elapsed since the amputation. The purposes of this study were to determine prevalence and factors associated with phantom pain and phantom sensations in upper limb amputees in The Netherlands. Additionally, the relationship between phantom pain, phantom sensations and prosthesis use in upper limb amputees was investigated. One hundred twenty-four upper limb amputees participated in this study. Subjects were asked to fill out a self-developed questionnaire scoring the following items: date, side, level, and reason of amputation, duration of experienced pain before amputation, frequencies with which phantom sensations, phantom pain, and stump pain are experienced, amount of trouble and suffering experienced, respectively, related to these sensations, type of phantom sensations, medical treatment received for phantom pain and/or stump pain, and the effects of the treatment, self medication, and prosthesis use. The response rate was 80%. The prevalence of phantom pain was 51%, of phantom sensations 76% and of stump pain 49%; 48% of the subjects experienced phantom pain a few times per day or more; 64% experienced moderate to very much suffering from the phantom pain. A significant association was found between phantom pain and phantom sensations (relative risk 11.3) and between phantom pain and stump pain (relative risk 1.9). No other factors associated with phantom pain or phantom sensations could be determined. Only four patients received medical treatment for their phantom pain. Phantom pain is a common problem in upper limb amputees that causes considerable suffering for the subjects involved. Only a minority of subjects are treated for phantom pain. Further research is needed to determine factors associated with phantom pain.