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.

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.

Patient satisfaction with physiotherapists is not inferior to surgeons in an arthroplasty review clinic: non-inferiority study of an expanded scope model of care.

Objective This study evaluated whether the satisfaction of patients attending a physiotherapy-led postarthroplasty review out-patient clinic was non-inferior to that of patients attending traditional surgeon clinics. Methods Using a modified nine-item Visit-Specific Satisfaction Instrument (VSQ-9), 50 patients attending the physiotherapy clinic and 50 patients attending surgeon clinics were surveyed. Sample means (±s.d.) were calculated for each domain of the VSQ-9. Non-inferiority testing was performed using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the adjusted mean difference to examine whether normalised patient satisfaction scores in the physiotherapy group were no worse than those in the surgeon group. Results Both groups were satisfied (overall domain; 100% of both groups rated good-excellent). Based on mean item score, there was strong evidence that the satisfaction of the physiotherapy group was non-inferior to that of the surgeon group (adjusted mean difference (physiotherapy - surgeon) in mean score 5.1 (95% CI -0.3, 10.4). Furthermore, the mean differences in all but one of the nine domains were in favour of the physiotherapy group in this study. Conclusion The satisfaction of patients attending a physiotherapy arthroplasty review clinic is not inferior to that of patients attending traditional surgeon clinics. What is known about the topic? A substitution model of care where an advanced practice physiotherapist reviews routine postarthroplasty patients instead of surgeons originated in the UK and has been adopted in Canada and Australia to address the increasingly overloaded public out-patient health services. Evidence of clinical and cost effectiveness has been demonstrated but, to the best of the authors' knowledge, only one paper has evaluated consumer engagement, and that paper was in a Canadian population. What does this paper add? This study evaluated the satisfaction of patients in an Australian public healthcare system and was able to demonstrate that patients seen by physiotherapists were no less satisfied than those seen by surgeons in traditional clinics. The findings support those reported in the Canadian study. This is an important step in the development and acceptance of these substitution model of care innovations locally. What are the implications for practitioners? The results of this study will provide an important addition to the evidence of the clinical efficacy of this model of care: that of consumer acceptance. This will assist with planning, expansion and rollout of similar initiatives in Australia.