As healthcare spending continues to outpace economic growth, legislators and healthcare economists have explored many processes aimed at improving efficiency and reducing waste within a bundled care environment. Gainsharing or the general concept that organizations and their employees can work together to continually improve outcomes at reduced expenditures in exchange for a portion of the savings has been shown to be effective within the healthcare system. Although gainsharing principles may be applicable to healthcare organizations and their physician partners, specific parameters should be followed when implementing these arrangements. This talk will discuss gainsharing strategies aimed at properly aligning healthcare organizations and physicians, which, if followed, will ensure the successful implementation of gainsharing initiatives.

Wound closure is not often an area that is discussed by orthopaedic surgeons. We commonly attend meetings and talks related to different types of implants and surgical technique but in reality the wound and how we close it maybe one of the most important aspects of a surgical procedure. The avoidance of wound complications such as unplanned clinic visits, readmissions, reoperations and deep infections are very important as we move into a world of bundled payments and public reporting of complications. Not to mention the poor results for the patients when wound complications occur. Often there is little thought about how wound closure and surgical dressings could affect surgical site healing. We all have a common belief that blisters, drainage and surgical site infections are rare. In the literature it has been shown that the method of wound closure can influence skin and soft tissue perfusion. Which closure techniques can achieve physiologic blood flow, which may improve wound healing? This talk will cover topics related to reducing the dead space, avoidance of hematoma formation and what the literature says regarding different types of wound closure materials.

There is great debate around how to treat patients with periprosthetic joint infections and there are different techniques utilised throughout the world with large regional differences. In the situation where implants are well fixed there is a potential advantage to retain ingrown implants in which removal would result in severe bone damage. However, there are multiple variables on both the patient side and the surgeon side which can influence the likelihood of success with this approach. In some patients, staged revision of large and well-fixed components will result in bone damage and compromised function, but the two-stage techniques may have great success at long term infection free survivorship. The literature suggests that selective implant retention and joint débridement may be an alternative for those patients who have complex well-fixed components, are not immunocompromised, have not developed sinus formation, and who have less virulent organisms on aspiration. Implant retention techniques should be approached with caution when patients have chronic illness such as diabetes or rheumatoid disease, use immunosuppressive medications, have a negative aspirate for microorganisms, or show any signs of loosening on radiographs or during intra-operative assessment. Like many aspects of patient care, proper patient selection and meticulous surgical techniques are important components to increasing success in these difficult clinical scenarios. This talk will focus on the data currently available in the literature to help participants gain a better understanding of how to individualise treatments for patients with periprosthetic infections.

Introduction

With the introduction of new technology in orthopaedics, surgeons must balance anticipated benefits in patient outcomes with challenges or complications associated with surgical learning curve for the technology. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the surgeon learning curve with a new multi-radius primary TKA system (primary TKA implant and instruments) designed for surgical team ease would impact clinical outcomes, surgical time and complications.

With the introduction of new technology in orthopaedics, surgeons must balance anticipated benefits in patient outcomes with challenges or complications associated with surgical learning curve for the technology. The purpose of this study was to determine whether surgeon learning curve with a new multi-radius primary TKA system and instruments designed to improve surgical team ease would impact clinical outcomes, surgical time, and complications.

From November 2012 to July 2015, 2369 primary TKAs were prospectively enrolled in two multicentre studies across 50 sites in 14 countries with a new knee system (NEW-TKA) evenly balanced across four configurations: cruciate retaining or posterior stabilised with either fixed bearing or rotating platform (CRFB, CRRP, PSFB, PSRP). 2128 knees had a<1 year visit and 1189 had a minimum 1 year visit. These knees were compared to a reference dataset of 843 primary TKAs from three manufacturers in the same four configurations with currently available products (CA-TKA). Demographics for NEW-TKA and CA-TKA were similar and typical for primary TKA. Operative times, clinical outcomes and a series of five patient reported outcomes were compared for NEW-TKA vs. CA-TKA. The first 10 New-TKA subjects for each surgeon were defined as learning curve cases (N=520) and were compared to all later subjects (N=1849). Patient reported outcome measure and clinical outcome analyses were covariate adjusted for patient demographics, pre-op assessment and days post-op.

Mean (SD) surgical time for NEW-TKA learning curve cases was 79.1 (24.3) minutes, which reduced thereafter to 73.6 (24.3) (p=0.002). Beyond 10 cases, there was a continued reduction in NEW-TKA surgical time (R-Squared = 0.031). After 10 cases, surgical time was on par with the mean (SD) 71.9 (21.6) for CA-TKA (p=0.078). PROM outcomes of the first 10 learning curve cases for NEW-TKA were not statistically different from later cases at less than 1 year or later when adjusted for relevant covariates including configuration, patient demographics, pre-op functional status, and time post-op (p-values > 0.01). PROM outcomes for NEW-TKA vs. CA-TKA under the same covariate adjustments showed a trend favoring KOOS ADL, Symptoms, and Sport and Recreation subscores at minimum 1 year (p-values < 0.01). The incidence of intraoperative operative site complications was 1.3% for the NEW-TKA learning curve cases which was similar to the 0.6% rate for historical CA-TKA (p=0.231) and the intraoperative complication rate for the NEW-TKA later cases was consistent with learning curve cases (p=0.158).

The introduction of new implants into the market place needs to have adequate data to support that they are safe and effective. Except for a minor increase in surgical time during the first 10 patients, this study found that surgeon learning curve with this new primary TKA system does not adversely affect patient short term outcomes and complication rates.

PURPOSE:

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is becoming more commonly performed and is more technically challenging than total knee replacement. Retention of the anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments requires more accurate re-creation of the patient's normal anatomic posterior slope with UKA. Purpose of this study was to accurately determine the posterior tibial slope in patients having medial or lateral UKA performed.