Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a technically challenging and costly procedure. It is well-documented that primary TKA (pTKA) have better survivorship than rTKA; however, we were unable to identify any studies explicitly investigating previous rTKA as a risk factor for failure following rTKA. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes following rTKA between patients undergoing index rTKA and those who had been previously revised. This retrospective, observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTKA at an academic orthopaedic speciality hospital between June 2011 and April 2020 with > one-year of follow-up. Patients were dichotomized based on whether this was their first revision procedure or not. Patient demographics, surgical factors, postoperative outcomes, and re-revision rates were compared between the groups.Aims
Methods
It has previously been shown that higher-volume hospitals have better outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). We were unable to identify any studies which investigated the effect of surgeon volume on the outcome of rTKA. We sought to investigate whether patients of high-volume (HV) rTKA surgeons have better outcomes following this procedure compared with those of low-volume (LV) surgeons. This retrospective study involved patients who underwent aseptic unilateral rTKA between January 2016 and March 2019, using the database of a large urban academic medical centre. Surgeons who performed ≥ 19 aseptic rTKAs per year during the study period were considered HV and those who performed < 19 per year were considered LV. Demographic characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.Aims
Methods
Previous studies have demonstrated that higher volume hospitals have better outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), in current literature there are no reports investigating the effect of surgeon volume. The purpose of this study is to investigate if patients of high-volume revision surgeons have better outcomes following rTKA as compared to patients of low volume surgeons. This retrospective observational analysis examined the rTKA database at a large urban academic medical center for aseptic, unilateral rTKA between January 2016 and March 2019 with at least 1-year of follow-up. Surgeon operative volume during the same time period was evaluated. Surgeons who performed at least 18 aseptic rTKA per year were considered Introduction
Methods
Previous reports have investigated the correlation between time to revision hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and reason for revision, but little is known regarding the impact of timing on outcomes following rTHA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of time to rTHA on both indication and outcomes of rTHA. This retrospective observational study reviewed patients who underwent unilateral, aseptic rTHA at an academic orthopedic specialty hospital between January 2016 and April 2019 with at least 1-year of follow-up. Patients were early revisions if they were revised within 2 years of primary THA (pTHA) or late revisions if revised after greater than 2 years. Patient demographics, surgical factors, and post-operative outcomes were compared between the groups. Post-hoc power analysis was performed (1-β=0.991).Introduction
Methods
Previous studies have reported an increased risk for postoperative complications in the Medicaid population undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). These studies have not controlled for the surgeon’s practice or patient care setting. This study aims to evaluate whether patient point of entry and Medicaid status plays a role in quality outcomes and discharge disposition following THA. The electronic medical record at our institution was retrospectively reviewed for all primary, unilateral THA between January 2016 and January 2018. THA recipients were categorized as either Medicaid or non-Medicaid patients based on a visit to our institution’s Hospital Ambulatory Care Center (HACC) within the six months prior to surgery. Only patients who had been operated on by surgeons (CML, JV, JDS, RS) with at least ten Medicaid and ten non-Medicaid patients were included in the study. The patients included in this study were 56.33% female, had a mean age of 60.85 years, and had a mean BMI of 29.14. The average length of follow-up was 343.73 days.Aims
Methods
Previous studies have reported an increased risk for postoperative complications in the Medicaid population undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). These studies have focused on payer type and have not controlled for the surgeon's practice or patient care setting. This study aims to evaluate whether patient point of entry plays a role in quality outcomes and discharge disposition following THA. The electronic medical record at our institution was retrospectively reviewed for all primary, elective, unilateral THA between January 2016 and June 2018. THA recipients were categorized as either Hospital Ambulatory Clinic Centers (HACC) with Medicaid as the primary payer or private office patients with a non-Medicaid primary payer based on a previous visit to our institution's HACC within the 6-months prior to surgery. Only patients who had been operated on by a surgeon with at least 10 HACC and 10 private office patients were included.Introduction
Methods
