Abstract
We undertook a comparative audit of 171 consecutive Hip and Knee Arthroplasties performed by an overseas team at an Independent Hospital (Group 1) between August 2005 and December 2005 and compared them to a corresponding number performed by all grades of surgeons at the local NHS Trust (Group 2). We examined patient selection criteria such as BMI and ASA grade and compared the early radiological outcome, complication rate, length of hospital stay and the patient satisfaction rate between the two groups.
We found that patients in Group 1 had a lower average BMI (27.13) and a better ASA grade (95% grade 1 and 2) as compared to Group 2 (BMI - 29.69 and 80% ASA Grade 1 and 2). The average hospital stay was 6.1 days in Group 1 and 8 days in Group 2.
Only 74% of the patients in Group 1 were completely satisfied with their treatment outcome as compared to 91% in Group 2. (Trent Arthroplasty Questionnaire)
There were 7 early dislocations (9.1%) in Group 1 (76 THRs), two requiring revision, as compared to one in Group 2 (1.3%, 84 THRs). Three other patients from Group 1 (TKRs) required a revision procedure within the first year.
There was an increased incidence of adverse features (mal-alignment and mal-positioning of components) on the post operative X rays of patients in Group 1 as compared to Group 2 leading to adverse clinical events. 11 patients (95TKRs) showed substantial femoral notching in Group 1 as compared to 3 in Group 2.
This study shows that patients selected for surgery by the overseas team were the fitter of the two groups, but had a significantly higher complication rate and a much lower satisfaction rate. The study underlines the potential risks of commissioning work to overseas teams in order to reduce waiting times.
