Aims
Patients and Methods
The Unified Classification System (UCS) was introduced
because of a growing need to have a standardised universal classification
system of periprosthetic fractures. It combines and simplifies many
existing classification systems, and can be applied to any fracture
around any partial or total joint replacement occurring during or
after operation. Our goal was to assess the inter- and intra-observer
reliability of the UCS in association with knee replacement when
classifying fractures affecting one or more of the femur, tibia
or patella. We used an international panel of ten orthopaedic surgeons with
subspecialty fellowship training and expertise in adult hip and
knee reconstruction (‘experts’) and ten residents of orthopaedic
surgery in the last two years of training (‘pre-experts’). They
each received 15 radiographs for evaluation. After six weeks they
evaluated the same radiographs again but in a different order. The reliability was assessed using the Kappa and weighted Kappa
values. The Kappa values for inter-observer reliability for the experts
and the pre-experts were 0.741 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.707
to 0.774) and 0.765 (95% CI 0.733 to 0.797), respectively. The weighted
Kappa values for intra-observer reliability for the experts and
pre-experts were 0.898 (95% CI 0.846 to 0.950) and 0.878 (95% CI
0.815 to 0.942) respectively. The UCS has substantial inter-observer reliability and ‘near
perfect’ intra-observer reliability when used for periprosthetic
fractures in association with knee replacement in the hands of experienced
and inexperienced users. Cite this article:
Balancing service provision and surgical training is a challenging issue that affects all healthcare systems. A multicentre prospective study of 1501 total hip replacements was undertaken to investigate whether there is an association between surgical outcome and the grade of the operating surgeon, and whether there is any difference in outcome if surgeons’ assistants assist with the operation, rather than orthopaedic trainees. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Oxford hip score (OHS) at five years. Secondary outcomes included the rate of revision and dislocation, operating time, and length of hospital stay. There was no significant difference in ΔOHS or complication rates between operations undertaken by trainers and trainees, or those at which surgeons’ assistants and trainees were the assistant. However, there was a significant difference in the duration of surgery, with a mean reduction of 28 minutes in those in which a surgeons’ assistant was the assistant. This study provides evidence that total hip replacements can be performed safely and effectively by appropriately trained surgeons in training, and that there are potential benefits of using surgeons’ assistants in orthopaedic surgery.