Variation in Demographics, Hospital, and Patient-Reported Outcomes following Total Hip Arthroplasty According to Biological Sex.

BACKGROUND: The effect of biological sex on the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unclear. Accounting for biological sex in research is crucial for reproducibility and accuracy. Average combined data may mask sex-related variation and obscure clinically relevant differences in outcomes. The aim of this study is to investigate hospital and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after THA by biological sex to elucidate differences and ultimately provide more equitable care. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing primary THA at a single large academic center between January 2013 and August 2020. Demographics, operative variables, hospital outcomes, and PROMs were compared between men and women patients. The PROMs included preoperative, 6-week, 6-month, and 1-year Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS JR), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) mental and physical scores, as well as satisfaction scores. RESULTS: A total of 6,418 patients were included (55% women). Women were older (P < 0.001), had a lower body mass index (P < 0.001), and were more likely to have public insurance (P < 0.001). Fewer women were discharged to home or self-care (P < 0.001). Women had higher rates of cementation (P < 0.001) and fracture within 90 days (P < 0.001), and these associations remained significant with adjusted multivariable analyses. Women had significantly higher pain and lower functional scores preoperatively; postoperatively, most PROMs were equivalent. CONCLUSION: Important differences were observed in several areas. Demographic parameters differed, and a variable effect of biological sex was observed on surgical and hospital outcomes. Women had an increased incidence of cemented femoral components (indicated for osteoporotic bone) and postoperative fractures. Women's PROMs demonstrated globally lower functional scores and higher pain preoperatively. Differences attributed to sex should continue to be investigated and accounted for in risk-stratification models. Future studies are needed to elucidate the underlying causes of observed biological sex differences and are essential for equitable arthroplasty care.

A Cautionary Tale: Malaligned Incentives in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Payment Model Reforms Threaten Promising Innovation and Access to Care.

Over the past several years, there have been notable changes and controversies involving Medicare reimbursement for total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We have seen the development and implementation of experimental bundled payment model pilot programs goals of improving quality and decreasing overall costs of care during the last decade. Many orthopaedic surgeons have embraced these programs and have demonstrated the ability to succeed in these new models by implementing strategies, such as preservice optimization, to shift care away from inpatient or postdischarge settings and reduce postoperative complications. However, these achievements have been met with continual reductions in surgeon reimbursement rates, lower bundle payment target pricings, modest increases in hospital reimbursement rates, and inappropriate valuations of THA and TKA Common Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. These challenges have led to an organized advocacy movement and spurred research involving the methods by which improvements have been made throughout the entire episode of arthroplasty care. Collectively, these efforts have recently led to a novel application of CPT codes recognized by payers to potentially capture presurgical optimization work. In this paper, we present an overview of contemporary payment models, summarize notable events involved in the review of THA and TKA CPT codes, review recent changes to THA and TKA reimbursement, and discuss future challenges faced by arthroplasty surgeons that threaten access to high-quality THA and TKA care.

Bilateral Total Hip Arthroplasty: Outcomes of Staged Versus Simultaneous Procedures Performed Using an Anterior-Based Muscle-Sparing Approach.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the United States continues to increase due to its ability to markedly improve patients' quality of life. This study investigated and compared the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of simultaneous (SI-THA) and staged (ST-THA) bilateral THA procedures using an anterior-based muscle-sparing (ABMS) approach. METHODS: This retrospective case control study evaluated perioperative and postoperative outcomes from primary bilateral SI-THA or ST-THA (within 365 days) performed with the ABMS approach by 3 surgeons at a single institution between January 2013 and August 2020. A total of 226 patients (113 in each cohort) were matched based on age, sex, body mass index, and comorbidity score. RESULTS: Compared to the ST-THA group, the SI-THA had shorter anesthesia duration (P < .001) and shorter length of stay (P < .001), but longer length of surgery (P = .002). There was no statistical significance between groups in blood transfusion rates, discharge dispositions, emergency department visits, hospital readmissions, or postoperative complications within one year. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate that SI-THA and ST-THA yield comparable results using the ABMS approach. Our perioperative and postoperative results suggest low rates of complications, emergency department visits, readmissions, and high rates of patient satisfaction scores. Therefore, both SI-THA and ST-THA can be considered by experienced surgeons as treatment for advanced bilateral hip arthritis.

A Specialist-Led Care Model: Aligning the Patient and Specialist for the Greatest Impact.

In the previous paper, discussing "Risk and the Future of Musculoskeletal Care," we reviewed the basic concepts of the risk corridor, implications on health care overall if we maintain a fee-for-service model, and the need for musculoskeletal specialists to begin taking on/managing risk to reinforce our presence in a "value-based care" system. This paper discusses the successes and failures of recent value-based care models and provides the framework for the paradigm of a specialist-led care model. We posit that orthopedic surgeons are the most knowledgeable physicians to manage musculoskeletal conditions, create new and innovative models, and lead value-based care to the next level.

Health Policy Views and Political Advocacy of Arthroplasty Surgeons: A Survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Members.

BACKGROUND: The American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) is the largest specialty society for arthroplasty surgeons in the United States and is dedicated to education, research, and advocacy. The purpose of this study was to identify the health policy views of AAHKS members and better characterize their advocacy participation. METHODS: A 22 question survey was electronically distributed multiple times via email link to all 3,638 United States members of AAHKS who were in practice or training in 2022. Study results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: There were 311 responses (9%), with 18% of respondents being within 5 years of practice and 38% having more than 20 years of practice. Respondents identified as Republicans (40%), Independents (37%), and Democrats (21%). Top policy issues included preserving physician reimbursement and equitable fee schedule representation (95%), the burden of prior authorization (53%), the impact of Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services regulations (39%), and medical liability and tort reform (39%). Members ranked maintaining appropriate physician reimbursement (44%) and advocating for patients (37%) as the top benefits to participation in advocacy. A majority of respondents (81%) stated that they spend more time on presurgery optimization now than 10 years ago. The most common barrier to advocacy participation was a lack of time (77%). CONCLUSION: Responding AAHKS members are well-informed, politically engaged, patient-oriented, and eager for a voice in policy decisions that affect the professional future of arthroplasty surgeons. These results can be used to help direct strategic efforts of the AAHKS Advocacy Committee to further increase advocacy efforts.

Prior Authorization in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Survey of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Membership.

BACKGROUND: This study surveyed the impact that prior authorization has on the practices of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS). METHODS: A 24-question survey was approved by the AAHKS Advocacy Committee and distributed to all 2,802 board-certified members of AAHKS. RESULTS: There were 353 survey responses (13%). Ninety-five percent of surgeons noted a 5-year increase in prior authorization. A majority (71%) of practices employ at least 1 staff member to exclusively work on prior authorization. Average time spent on prior authorization was 15 h/wk (range, 1 to 125) and average number of claims peer week was 18 (range, 1 to 250). Surgeries (99%) were the most common denial. These were denied because nonoperative treatment had not been tried (71%) or had not been attempted for enough time (67%). Most (57%) prior authorization processes rarely/never changed the treatment provided. Most (56%) indicated that prior authorization rarely/never followed evidence-based guidelines. A majority (93%) expressed high administrative burden as well as negative clinical outcomes (87%) due to prior authorization including delays to access care (96%) at least sometimes. DISCUSSION: Prior authorization has increased in the past 5 years resulting in high administrative burden. Prior authorizations were most common for TJA surgeries because certain nonoperative treatments were not attempted or not attempted for enough time. Surgeons indicated that prior authorization may be detrimental to high-value care and lead to potentially harmful delays in care without ultimately changing the management of the patient.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

Patient-Reported Outcome Metrics in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes several provisions that focus on improving the delivery of health care in the United States. Reducing overall healthcare costs and improving the quality of care delivered are two overarching themes of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. An evaluation of quality in total joint arthroplasty focuses on three main areas: complications, readmissions, and, more recently, patient-reported outcomes. Patient-reported outcomes allow surgeons and patients to objectively document pain relief and functional gain after total joint arthroplasty. Surgeons, groups, or hospitals that commit to the collection of patient-reported outcomes must consider which patient-reported outcomes to capture, the workflow and timing of postoperative patient-reported outcome collection, and how to minimize the burden of patient-reported outcome collection on both patients and surgeons.

Building a Patient-Reported Outcome Metric Database: One Hospital's Experience.

BACKGROUND: A number of provisions exist within the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that focus on improving the delivery of health care in the United States, including quality of care. From a total joint arthroplasty perspective, the issue of quality increasingly refers to quantifying patient-reported outcome metrics (PROMs). This article describes one hospital's experience in building and maintaining an electronic PROM database for a practice of 6 board-certified orthopedic surgeons. METHODS: The surgeons advocated to and worked with the hospital to contract with a joint registry database company and hire a research assistant. They implemented a standardized process for all surgical patients to fill out patient-reported outcome questionnaires at designated intervals. RESULTS: To date, the group has collected patient-reported outcome metric data for >4500 cases. The data are frequently used in different venues at the hospital including orthopedic quality metric and research meetings. In addition, the results were used to develop an annual outcome report. The annual report is given to patients and primary care providers, and portions of it are being used in discussions with insurance carriers. CONCLUSION: Building an electronic database to collect PROMs is a group undertaking and requires a physician champion. A considerable amount of work needs to be done up front to make its introduction a success. Once established, a PROM database can provide a significant amount of information and data that can be effectively used in multiple capacities.

Current Orthopaedic Surgeon Practices for Nonarthroplasty Treatment of Osteoarthritis of Adult Hip and Knee.

Evidence-based guidelines have recently been published for the nonarthroplasty treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee and are becoming an expected part of comprehensive patient care. To understand how current treatment practices correlate with these guidelines, a survey was administered to 50 consecutive hip replacement and 50 consecutive knee replacement patients immediately before arthroplasty for osteoarthritis in one group practice. This article is a compilation of patients' usage of the modalities suggested in two such exemplary guidelines and demonstrates that patient and surgeon preferences, as well as factors such as preoperative Oxford score, body mass index, age, and joint involved, affect usage of one or more of the commonly employed preoperative modalities. This information provides orthopaedic surgeons and administrators with a compilation of responses that reflects surgeon and patient preferences for treatment before surgery.

The Association of Season of Surgery and Patient Reported Outcomes following Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: Understanding the impact of situational variables on surgical recovery can improve outcomes in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Literature examining hospital outcomes by season remains inconclusive, with limited focus on patient experience. The aim of this study is to investigate if there are differences in hospital and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMS) after THA depending on the season of the index procedure to improve surgeon preoperative counseling. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing primary THA at a single large academic center between January 2013 and August 2020. Demographic, operative, hospital, and PROMs were gathered from the institutional electronic medical record and our institutional joint replacement outcomes database. Results: 6418 patients underwent primary THA and met inclusion criteria. Of this patient population, 1636 underwent surgery in winter, 1543 in spring, 1811 in summer, and 1428 in fall. PROMs were equivalent across seasons at nearly time points. The average age of patients was 65 (+/- 10) years, with an average BMI of 29.3 (+/- 6). Rates of complications including ED visits within 30 days, readmission within 90 days, unplanned readmission, dislocation, fracture, or wound infection were not significantly different by season (P > .05). Conclusion: Our findings indicate no differences in complications and PROMs at 1 year in patients undergoing THA during 4 distinct seasons. Notably, patients had functional differences at the second follow-up visit, suggesting variation in short-term recovery. Patients could be counseled that they have similar rates of complications and postoperative recovery regardless of season.

Bundled payments for care improvement initiative: the next evolution of payment formulations: AAHKS Bundled Payment Task Force.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act contains a number of provision for improving the delivery of healthcare in the United States, among the most impactful of which may be the call for modifications in the packaging of and payment for care that is bundled into episodes. The move away from fee for service payment models to payment for coordinated care delivered as comprehensive episodes is heralded as having great potential to enhance quality and reduce cost, thereby increasing the value of the care delivered. This effort builds on the prior experience around delivering care for arthroplasty under the Acute Care Episode Project and offers extensions and opportunities to modify the experience moving forward. Total hip and knee arthroplasties are viewed as ideal treatments to test the effectiveness of this payment model. Providers must learn the nuances of these modified care delivery concepts and evaluate whether their environment is conducive to success in this arena. This fundamental shift in payment for care offers both considerable risk and tremendous opportunity for physicians. Acquiring an understanding of the recent experience and the determinants of future success will best position orthopaedic surgeons to thrive in this new environment. Although this will remain a dynamic exercise for some time, early experience may enhance the chances for long term success, and physicians can rightfully lead the care delivery redesign process.

Outcomes of morbidly obese patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with the anterior-based muscle-sparing approach.

Obesity is associated with an increased risk of hip osteoarthritis, resulting in an increased number of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed annually. This study examines the peri- and postoperative outcomes of morbidly obese (MO) patients (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) compared to healthy weight (HW) patients (BMI 18.5 to < 25 kg/m2) who underwent a THA using the anterior-based muscle-sparing (ABMS) approach. This retrospective cohort study observes peri- and postoperative outcomes of MO and HW patients who underwent a primary, unilateral THA with the ABMS approach. Data from surgeries performed by three surgeons at a single institution was collected from January 2013 to August 2020 and analyzed using Microsoft Excel and Stata 17.0. This study compares 341 MO to 1,140 HW patients. Anaesthesia, surgery duration, and length of hospital stay was significantly lower in HW patients compared to MO. There was no difference in incidence of pulmonary embolism, periprosthetic fracture, or dislocation between the two groups. The rate of infection in MO patients (1.47%) was significantly higher than HW patients (0.14%). Preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) show a significantly higher pain level in MO patients and a significantly lower score in functional abilities. Overall, six-week and one-year postoperative data show higher levels of pain, lower levels of functional improvement, and lower satisfaction scores in the MO group. The comorbidities of obesity are well studied; however, the implications of THA using the ABMS approach have not been studied. Our peri- and postoperative results demonstrate significant improvements in PROMs in MO patients undergoing THA. However, the incidence of deep infection was significantly higher in this group compared with HW patients.

Outcomes of the Anterior-Based Muscle-Sparing Approach in Elective Total Hip Arthroplasty in Nonagenarians.

Background: As the population ages, total hip arthroplasty has become more common in elderly patients including patients over the age of 90 years. Efficacy in this age group has been established, though literature regarding safety of total hip arthroplasty in nonagenarians is mixed. The anterior-based muscle-sparing (ABMS) approach, which exploits the intermuscular plane between the tensor fasciae latae and the gluteus medius, has proposed benefits of fast recovery, excellent stability, and reduced bleeding and may be adventitious among elderly, more fragile patients. Methods: A total of 38 consecutive nonagenarians undergoing elective, primary total hip arthroplasty via the ABMS approach for any indication from 2013 to 2020 were identified, and information regarding operative outcomes and patient-reported outcomes was gathered from review of medical records and our institutional joint replacement outcomes database. Results: Included patients ranged from 90 to 97 years of age with the majority classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists score 2 (50%) or American Society of Anesthesiologists 3 (47.4%). The mean operative time was 74.6 minutes ± 13.6 minutes. Of all patients, 5 required a transfusion, 2 patients were readmitted within 90 days, and there were no major complications. The mean hospital length of stay was 2.8 days ± 0.8 days with 22 patients (57.9%) discharged to a skilled nursing facility. Limited patient-reported outcomes data showed statistically significant improvements in most outcomes scores at 6 months to 1 year postoperatively compared to preoperative scores. Conclusions: The ABMS approach is safe and effective in nonagenarians who may benefit from decreased amounts of bleeding and recovery times associated with the ABMS approach, which is evident from the low complication rates, relatively short hospital lengths of stay, and acceptable transfusion rates compared to previous studies.

Rural-Urban Differences in Hospital and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: Rural patients have unique health-care factors influencing outcomes of arthroplasty, hypothetically putting these patients at increased risk for complications following total joint arthroplasty. The aim of this study is to better understand differences in patient outcomes and satisfaction between rural and urban patients receiving care in an urban setting and to provide more equitable care. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty at a single large academic center between January 2013 and August 2020. Demographic, operative, and hospital outcomes were obtained from the institutional electronic medical record. Rurality was determined by rural-urban code (RUC) classifications by zip code with RUC codes 1-3 defined as urban and RUC 4-10 defined as rural. Results: Patients from urban areas were more likely to visit the emergency department within 30 days postoperatively (P = .006) and be readmitted within 90 days (P < .001). However, unplanned (P < .001) admissions were higher in the rural group. There was no statistical difference in postoperative complications (P = .4). At 6 months, rural patients had higher patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score total (P = .05), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score interval (P = .05), self-reported functional improvement (P < .05), improvements in pain (P < .05), and that the surgery met expectations (P < .05). However, these values did not reach minimal clinically important difference. Conclusions: There may be differences in emergency department visits, readmissions, and PROMs in rural vs urban populations undergoing total hip arthroplasty in an urban setting. Patient access to care and attitudes of rural patients toward health care may underlie these findings. Understanding differences in PROMs, satisfaction, and hospital-based outcomes based on rurality is essential to provide equitable arthroplasty care.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

2023 American College of Rheumatology and American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline for the Optimal Timing of Elective Hip or Knee Arthroplasty for Patients With Symptomatic Moderate-to-Severe Osteoarthritis or Advanced Symptomatic Osteonecrosis With Secondary Arthritis for Whom Nonoperative Therapy Is Ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based consensus recommendations for the optimal timing of hip and knee arthroplasty to improve patient-important outcomes including, but not limited to, pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year for patients with symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis of the hip or knee who have previously attempted nonoperative therapy, and for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective, and who have chosen to undergo elective hip or knee arthroplasty (collectively referred to as TJA). METHODS: We developed 13 clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. After a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low), and evidence tables were created. A Voting Panel, including 13 physicians and patients, discussed the PICO questions until consensus was achieved on the direction (for/against) and strength (strong/conditional) of the recommendations. RESULTS: The panel conditionally recommended against delaying TJA to pursue additional nonoperative treatment including physical therapy, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, ambulatory aids, and intraarticular injections. It conditionally recommended delaying TJA for nicotine reduction or cessation. The panel conditionally recommended delay for better glycemic control for patients who have diabetes mellitus, although no specific measure or level was identified. There was consensus that obesity by itself was not a reason for delay, but that weight loss should be strongly encouraged, and the increase in operative risk should be discussed. The panel conditionally recommended against delay in patients who have severe deformity or bone loss, or in patients who have a neuropathic joint. Evidence for all recommendations was graded as low or very low quality. CONCLUSION: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations regarding the optimal timing of TJA in patients who have symptomatic and radiographic moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis or advanced symptomatic osteonecrosis with secondary arthritis for whom nonoperative therapy was ineffective to improve patient-important outcomes, including pain, function, infection, hospitalization, and death at 1 year. We acknowledge that the evidence is of low quality primarily due to indirectness and hope future research will allow for further refinement of the recommendations.

The ABLE Anterior-Based Muscle-Sparing Approach: A Safe and Effective Option for Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: The direct anterior and posterior approaches are well-researched options in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The less-studied anterior-based muscle-sparing approach, also known as the ABLE advanced anterior approach, centers on minimizing surgical trauma and medical costs while maintaining or improving patient outcomes. Material and methods: THAs performed using the ABLE approach by 3 surgeons at a single institution between January 2013 and August 2020 were retrospectively assessed for outcomes pertaining to safety and performance intraoperatively, perioperatively, and postoperatively. Additionally, intraoperative and postoperative complications were evaluated, and patient-reported outcome measures and radiographic outcomes out to 1-year follow-up. Results: There were 6251 THAs (5433 patients) eligible for inclusion. The mean surgical time was 65 minutes, mean intraoperative blood loss was 204 mL, and the transfusion rate was 0.5%. Patients had a mean length of stay of 1.4 days. Overall, 93.4% of patients were discharged home, 1.9% visited the emergency department within 30 days, and 2.9% had an unplanned readmission to the hospital within 90 days. The overall major surgical complication rate was 1.18%, with a dislocation rate of 0.13%, a deep infection rate of 0.19%, and a postoperative periprosthetic fracture rate of 0.37%. Conclusions: The minimally invasive ABLE approach is a safe and effective surgical approach for patients undergoing THA. It can be performed efficiently and with limited complications, making it an appealing option for surgeons to utilize during this era of value-based care.