The contemporary practice of orthopaedic surgery
requires an evidence-based approach to support all medical and surgical
interventions. In this essay, the author expresses a forthright,
personal and somewhat prejudiced appeal to retain the legitimacy
of clinical decision making in conditions that are rare, contain
multiple variables, have a solution that generally works or has
an unpredictable course. Cite this article:
Objective. To investigate the effectiveness of applying fast track surgery concept in primary total hip arthroplasty. Methods. The data of patients with primary total hip arthroplasty in our department from January 1, 2013 to October 1, 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into traditional recovery group, enhanced recoverygroup and update enhanced recovery group according to different interventions. The blood loss, transfusion rate, complications rate, postoperative function, length of stay, hospitalization expense and readmission rate were compared between three groups. Results. A total of 435 cases were included. Compared with traditional recovery group, the average blood loss, length of stay and total cases of complication in update enhanced recovery group were reduced 91.44 ml, 1.34 days and 14.05%, respectively, and the differences showed statistical significance. From 2013 to 2015 the hip flexion and abduction degree increased annually, the differences also showed statistical significance. The blood transfusion rate, other complications and hospitalization expense were all reduced, but there were no statistical significance. Conclusions. The emphasis of fast track surgery concept in primary total hip arthroplasty was the management in perioperative period. Through continuous optimization of intervention measures under the guidance of
Introduction. Classification systems are used throughout Trauma and Orthopaedic (T&O) surgery, designed to be used for communication, planning treatment options, predicting outcomes and research purposes. As a result the majority of T&O knowledge is based upon such systems with most of the published literature using classifications. Therefore we wanted to investigate the basis for the classification culture in our specialty by reviewing Orthopaedic classifications and the literature to assess whether the classifications had been independently validated. Methods. 185 published classification systems within T&O were selected. The original publication for each classification system was reviewed to assess whether any validation process had been performed. Each paper was reviewed to see if any intra-observer or inter-observer error was reported. A PubMed search was then conducted for each classification system to assess whether any independent validation had been performed. Any measurement of validation and error was recorded. Results. Four of the 185 classifications (2.1%) had a validation process described in the initial paper that introduced that classification to the literature. 54 (29.1%) of the classifications had a related study that independently assessed the classification for validity. Of these 54, only 10 (18.5%) demonstrated either an intra-observer or inter-observer error that is described as excellent (kappa score >0.8). Only 2 classification systems of the 54 (3.7%) were shown to have both intra-observer and inter-observer errors as excellent, meaning only 2 of the 185 classification systems reviewed (1.1%) have been shown to be highly reproducible. Conclusion. Over 70% of classification systems in T&O have never been independently validated and assessed for intra-observer and inter-observer error. Of those that have, only 2 are excellent. Such a finding raises questions about the use of classification systems within T&O and queries the use of classification systems in the literature as part of
The authors entered patients into a randomised trial to compare the results of the use of cemented and cementless acetabular prostheses between 1993 and 1995. The results of mid-term wear studies at average follow up of eight years were reported in the journal in 2004. We now present long-term results to show the eventual fate of the hip replacements under study. The initial study group of 162 patients was randomly assigned to a modular titanium cup with a polyethylene liner or an all polyethylene cemented cup. All patients received a cemented stem with a 26 mm head and a standardised surgical technique. The polyethylene wear was estimated via head penetration measurement and the mid-term results showed a significantly higher wear rate in the cementless cups compared to the cemented cups (0.15mm/yr vs. 0.07mm/yr p<0.0001). The prediction was that this would lead to a higher rate of aseptic loosening in the cementless group. Patients have now been re-examined at an average of 15 years with the main emphasis on prosthesis survival. Wear studies were also performed. There were exclusions from the initial study because of death and reoperation for reasons other than aseptic loosening. The number of patients in this longer-term study had decreased as a result of death and loss to follow up. Revisions for aseptic loosening did not follow the path as suggested by the mid term wear studies. There were five cup revisions in the cemented group and one cup revision in the cementless group for aseptic loosening. No femoral stem was revised for aseptic loosening. Details of the long-term wear studies will be presented and osteolysis rates and extent documented. Despite the statistically significant difference in wear rates at the mid term, an incorrect prediction of eventual loosening rates was made. The authors believe that there are many factors other than wear rates involved in longevity of fixation. We also believe there are many weaknesses in long term prospective, randomised trials in joint replacement and question whether they are, in fact, level 1 evidence in the age of
