Waiting for hip revision surgery: the impact on patient disability.

OBJECTIVE: Increased wait times for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) are a concern nationally and provincially. Additionally, the number of patients requiring revision of their initial TJA is increasing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the wait times and impact of waiting for revision TJA. METHODS: We followed 127 revision hip arthroplasty patients (mean age 68 y) prospectively while they waited for surgery. We collected Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (pain, stiffness and physical function) data at the decision for surgery and at 6-month intervals until surgery. RESULTS: The mean wait time for surgery was 123.8 days (mean wait times for individual surgeons ranged from 7 to 213 d). Of the patients, 106 waited < 6 months, 12 waited 6-12 months and 9 waited > 12 months. Wait times evaluated up to 6 months, 6-12 months or > 12 months demonstrated significant increases in pain (F = 7.12, p = 0.01), with a mean change of 2.6 points when patients waited > 6 months. Physical disability increased (F = 4.61, p = 0.01), with a mean change of 5.1 points when the wait time was 6-12 months and 8.8 points when the wait time was > 12 months. CONCLUSION: Waiting > 6 months for revision hip arthroplasty resulted in significant increases in pain and physical disability.

Predictors of functional outcome two years following revision hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about factors that might predict functional outcome following revision hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of pain and physical function at two years following revision total hip arthroplasty and to evaluate whether the time that the patient waited for the surgery and whether the patient had complications were significant predictors of outcome. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six patients (126 hips) were entered prospectively into the study when their name was placed on the waiting list for surgery. Baseline measures included demographic factors, comorbidities, and the responses to the Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) questionnaires. Follow-up was carried out at six-month intervals while the patient was waiting for the surgery; within one week prior to the surgery; and at six, twelve, and twenty-four months after the surgery. Patient age and gender, the preoperative WOMAC pain and function scores, the physical and mental component scores of the SF-36, comorbidities, the number of revisions, bilateral joint replacement, and the severity of the revision were evaluated as possible predictors of ultimate pain and function as measured with the WOMAC instrument. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 68.6 years. Improvement in WOMAC pain and function scores plateaued at six months. The mean pain score (and standard deviation) improved from 9.4 +/- 4.1 points preoperatively to 3.9 +/- 3.9 points at six months postoperatively, and the mean function score improved from 35.4 +/- 14.1 to 19.1 +/- 13.2 points. Preoperative pain (p = 0.002) and comorbidity (p = 0.02) were significant predictors of pain at two years. There was a trend toward preoperative function predicting function at twenty-four months (p = 0.07). There was no significant deterioration in the WOMAC pain or function score while the patients waited for surgery. Twenty-eight patients had complications. When the time that the patient waited for the surgery and complications were added to the models, only complications were found to be predictive of outcome (p = 0.04 for pain and p = 0.05 for function). Four patients required repeat revision during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with better preoperative pain scores and fewer comorbidities have better outcomes following revision total hip arthroplasty. Although the time that the patient waited for the revision was not predictive of the ultimate WOMAC pain and function scores, we believe that performing revision arthroplasty before the patient has substantial functional compromise potentially improves the outcome.

The effectiveness of video feedback in the acquisition of orthopedic technical skills.

BACKGROUND: The addition of video feedback to bench model training offers residents the opportunity to see themselves perform a surgical task. Videotaped feedback therefore promotes self-evaluation, a critical learning skill, and also has the potential to influence how a resident executes a skill once they have had the opportunity to see themselves perform the task. METHODS: Twenty-nine surgical residents were video recorded while performing three technical skills. They then were randomly assigned to receive either no feedback, video feedback alone, or video feedback with the help of an expert, an orthopedic surgeon. The surgical task was then repeated. Orthopedic surgeons evaluated the videotapes using the global rating scale and technical checklist form. RESULTS: One-way between-subject analysis of variance comparing the pretest and post-test difference scores on three different measures for each of the three tasks revealed no statistically significant differences. After controlling for rater variance, the global rating scores across the three surgical tasks did not reveal any statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: This study failed to demonstrate an improvement in technical skills based on utilization of video feedback.

Long-term clinical experience with fresh osteochondral allografts for articular knee defects in high demand patients.

Fresh osteochondral allografts are used to repair osteoarticular defects of the knee. For post-traumatic defects recent advances in other techniques for cartilage repair and resurfacing have reduced the role of allograft tissue transplantation to defects larger than 3 cm in diameter and 1 cm in depth.A fresh osteochondral allograft that has been harvested from a donor within 24 h from death and preserved in 4 degrees C for up to 4 days shows 100% viability of the cartilage. The avascular bone remains structurally intact and mechanically strong until it is replaced by host bone or until it is weakened or absorbed. The indications for fresh osteochondral allografts for reconstructive surgery of the articular surface of the knee do not justify the use of immunosuppressive drugs and we therefore believe that surgical vascularization of the grafts should not be carried out.This clinical approach can provide a reconstructive solution for younger higher demand patients where implants are not desirable and arthrodesis is not acceptable. A clinical follow-up study as early as 1975 showed successful early outcomes. More recently, survival analysis found 95% survival at 5 years, 71% at 10 years, and 66% at 20 years. It was learned that older patients, bipolar transplants, improper loading of the graft, and grafts for osteoarthritis and steroid-induced avascular necrosis do not lead to good long-term outcomes.We would like to describe here some of our long-term clinical experience concerning this surgery.

Effectiveness of repeated video feedback in the acquisition of a surgical technical skill.

BACKGROUND: Previously we evaluated the effectiveness of videotaped feedback as a teaching tool for surgical residents using 3 different core skills in the field of orthopedics. Our results revealed no significant differences in technical skill among surgical residents who were exposed to videotaped feedback and those who were not. Several limitations in the study were identified, including the presence of only a single exposure to videotaped feedback. In the present study we included repeated exposures to determine if skill acquisition was enhanced. METHODS: Thirty-three surgical residents were randomly assigned to receive either no videotaped feedback (control group) or repeated video feedback over 3 consecutive weekly practice sessions on a vascular anastomosis bench model. On the fourth week, vascular surgeons blinded to the 2 groups evaluated the residents on the same vascular anastomosis task using a global rating scale and technical checklist forms. RESULTS: Twenty-six (79%) of the residents participated. Independent t tests comparing the scores of each of the 2 different measures between the control group and repeated videotaped feedback group revealed no statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the performance of a vascular anastomosis in a bench-training model between residents who were exposed to video feedback over several practice sessions and those who received no video feedback.