Abstract
By the end of training, every registrar is expected to demonstrate proficiency in total knee replacement (TKR). It is unclear whether functional outcomes for knee arthroplasty performed by training grade doctors under supervision of a consultant have equivalent functional outcomes to those performed by consultants.
This study investigated the functional outcomes following TKR in patients operated on by a supervised orthopaedic trainee compared to a consultant orthopaedic surgeon. Patients undergoing surgery by a consultant (n=491) or by a trainee under supervision (n=145) between 2003 and 2006 were included. There was a single implant, approach and postoperative rehabilitation regime. Patients were reviewed eighteen months, three years and five years postoperatively.
There were no significant differences in preoperative patient characteristics between the groups. There was no difference in length of stay or transfusion or tourniquet time. Both consultant (p<0.001) and trainee (p<0.001) groups showed significant improvement in AKSK and AKSF scores between preoperative and 18 month review and there was no difference in the magnitude of observed improvement between groups (AKSK p=0.853; AKSF p=0.970). There were no significant differences in either score between the groups preoperatively or at any review point postoperatively. At five years postoperative, both groups had a median OKS of 34 (p=0.921).
This is the largest reported series of outcomes following primary TKR examining functional outcome linked with grade of surgeon. It shows that a supervised trainee will achieve comparable functional outcomes at up to 5 years post operatively.
