There is evidence that high levels of physical
activity following arthroplasty of the hip or knee can lead to early revision.
However, the term ‘highly active’ is not well defined. A validated ankle accelerometer was used to quantify activity
in 13 patients, who had undergone a total of 20 arthroplasties of
the lower limbs and who had active lifestyles. The assessments were
taken at a mean of 8.7 years post-operatively (1.8 to 15.8). The mean gait cycles per day was 8273 (5964 to 12 557), which
extrapolates to 3.0 million cycles per year (cpy) (2.2 to 4.6).
The mean percentage of time spent in high activity mode was 4.3%,
or about one hour per day. The mean percentage of cycles in high
activity was 40%. Based on these data, we propose the following definitions of
high activity: >
3 million cpy; one hour per day in high activity
mode; 40% of cycles in high activity mode. Extrapolating the sample of activity over the time since operation,
the mean cycles per arthroplasty was 25.2 million, with a maximum
of 44.1 million. No joint has been revised, or shows evidence of
impending failure. Cite this article:
The aim of this study was to define return to
theatre (RTT) rates for elective hip and knee replacement (HR and
KR), to describe the predictors and to show the variations in risk-adjusted
rates by surgical team and hospital using national English hospital
administrative data. . We examined information on 260 206 HRs and 315 249 KRs undertaken
between April 2007 and March 2012. The 90-day RTT rates were 2.1%
for HR and 1.8% for KR. Male gender, obesity, diabetes and several
other comorbidities were associated with higher odds for both index
procedures. For HR,
The Oxford hip and knee scores (OHS and OKS)
are validated patient-reported outcome measures used in patients undergoing
total hip replacement (THR),
Our main aim was to describe the trend in the comorbidities of patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and knee arthroplasties (KAs) between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2018 in England. We combined data from the National Joint Registry (NJR) on primary elective hip and knee arthroplasties performed between 2005 and 2018 with pre-existing conditions recorded at the time of their primary operation from Hospital Episodes Statistics. We described the temporal trend in the number of comorbidities identified using the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and how this varied by age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, index of multiple deprivation, and type of KA.Aims
Methods
Our aim was to determine the pre-operative sporting profiles of patients undergoing primary joint replacement and to establish if they were able to return to sport after surgery. A postal survey was completed by 2085 patients between one and three years after operation. They had undergone one of five operations, namely total hip replacement,
Survival analysis is an important tool for assessing the outcome of total joint replacement. The Kaplan-Meier method is used to estimate the incidence of revision of a prosthesis over time, but does not account appropriately for competing events which preclude revision. In the presence of competing death, this method will lead to statistical bias and the curve will lose its interpretability. A valid comparison of survival results between studies using the method is impossible without accounting for different rates of competing events. An alternative and easily applicable approach, the cumulative incidence of competing risk, is proposed. Using three simulated data sets and realistic data from a cohort of 406 consecutive cementless total hip prostheses, followed up for a minimum of ten years, both approaches were compared and the magnitude of potential bias was highlighted. The Kaplan-Meier method overestimated the incidence of revision by almost 4% (60% relative difference) in the simulations and more than 1% (31.3% relative difference) in the realistic data set. The cumulative incidence of competing risk approach allows for appropriate accounting of competing risk and, as such, offers an improved ability to compare survival results across studies.