Wound complications are reported in up to 10% hip and knee arthroplasties and there is a proven association between wound complications and deep prosthetic infections. In this randomised controlled trial (RCT) we explore the potential benefits of a portable, single use, incisional negative pressure wound therapy dressing (iNPWTd) on wound exudate, length of stay (LOS), wound complications, dressing changes and cost-effectiveness following total hip and knee arthroplasties. A total of 220 patients undergoing elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasties were recruited into in a non-blinded RCT. For the final analysis there were 102 patients in the study group and 107 in the control group.Objectives
Methods
Recent publication of reports showing high revision rates for hip and knee replacements carried out in Independent Sector Treatment Centres (ISTCs) has raised doubts regarding their ability to provide high quality healthcare. The high revision rates also create a financial burden to the NHS. The poor quality of data collected at ISTCs makes their performance difficult to evaluate. Funds may be better spent improving existing NHS facilities rather than establishing parallel ISTCs.
In England and Wales more than 175 000 hip and
knee arthroplasties were performed in 2012. There continues to be a
steady increase in the demand for joint arthroplasty because of
population demographics and improving survivorship. Inevitably though
the absolute number of periprosthetic infections will probably increase
with severe consequences on healthcare provision. The Department
of Health and the Health Protection Agency in United Kingdom established
a Surgical Site Infection surveillance service (SSISS) in 1997 to
undertake surveillance of surgical site infections. In 2004 mandatory
reporting was introduced for one quarter of each year. There has
been a wide variation in reporting rates with variable engagement
with the process. The aim of this article is to improve surgeon
awareness of the process and emphasise the importance of engaging
with SSISS to improve the quality and type of data submitted. In
Exeter we have been improving our practice by engaging with SSISS.
Orthopaedic surgeons need to take ownership of the data that are
submitted to ensure these are accurate and comprehensive. Cite this article:
As of April 2010 all NHS institutions in the United Kingdom are required to publish data on surgical site infection, but the method for collecting this has not been decided. We examined 7448 trauma and orthopaedic surgical wounds made in patients staying for at least two nights between 2000 and 2008 at our institution and calculated the rate of surgical site infection using three definitions: the US Centers for Disease Control, the United Kingdom Nosocomial Infection National Surveillance Scheme and the ASEPSIS system. On the same series of wounds, the infection rate with outpatient follow-up according to Centre for Disease Control was 15.45%, according to the UK Nosocomial infection surveillance was 11.32%, and according to ASEPSIS was 8.79%. These figures highlight the necessity for all institutions to use the same method for diagnosing surgical site infection. If different methods are used, direct comparisons will be invalid and published rates of infection will be misleading.
This paper considers the new financial infrastructure of the National Health Service and provides a resource for orthopaedic surgeons. We describe the importance of accurate documentation and data collection for National Health Service hospital Trust finances and league tables, and support our discussion with examples drawn from our local audit work.
