Dataset Information

Control strategies to prevent total hip replacement-related infections: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To synthesise the available evidence and estimate the comparative efficacy of control strategies to prevent total hip replacement (THR)-related surgical site infections (SSIs) using a mixed treatment comparison.

Design

Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison.

Setting

Hospital and other healthcare settings.

Participants

Patients undergoing THR.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

The number of THR-related SSIs occurring following the surgical operation.

Results

12 studies involving 123 788 THRs and 9 infection control strategies were identified. The strategy of 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+conventional ventilation' significantly reduced the risk of THR-related SSI compared with the referent strategy (no systemic antibiotics+plain cement+conventional ventilation), OR 0.13 (95% credible interval (CrI) 0.03-0.35), and had the highest probability (47-64%) and highest median rank of being the most effective strategy. There was some evidence to suggest that 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+laminar airflow' could potentially increase infection risk compared with 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+conventional ventilation', 1.96 (95% CrI 0.52-5.37). There was no high-quality evidence that antibiotic-impregnated cement without systemic antibiotic prophylaxis was effective in reducing infection compared with plain cement with systemic antibiotics, 1.28 (95% CrI 0.38-3.38).

Conclusions

We found no convincing evidence in favour of the use of laminar airflow over conventional ventilation for prevention of THR-related SSIs, yet laminar airflow is costly and widely used. Antibiotic-impregnated cement without systemic antibiotics may not be effective in reducing THR-related SSIs. The combination with the highest confidence for reducing SSIs was 'systemic antibiotics+antibiotic-impregnated cement+conventional ventilation'. Our evidence synthesis underscores the need to review current guidelines based on the available evidence, and to conduct further high-quality double-blind randomised controlled trials to better inform the current clinical guidelines and practice for prevention of THR-related SSIs.

SUBMITTER: Zheng H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3948634 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Control strategies to prevent total hip replacement-related infections: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison.

Zheng Henry H Barnett Adrian G AG Merollini Katharina K Sutton Alex A Cooper Nicola N Berendt Tony T Wilson Jennie J Graves Nicholas N

BMJ open 20140306 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To synthesise the available evidence and estimate the comparative efficacy of control strategies to prevent total hip replacement (THR)-related surgical site infections (SSIs) using a mixed treatment comparison.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison.<h4>Setting</h4>Hospital and other healthcare settings.<h4>Participants</h4>Patients undergoing THR.<h4>Primary and secondary outcome measures</h4>The number of THR-related SSIs occurring following the surgi ...[more]

PMID: 24604480

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundProlonged physical impairments in range of movement, postural stability and walking speed are commonly reported following total hip replacement (THR). It is unclear from the current body of evidence what kind of exercises should be performed to maximize patient function and quality of life.Methods/designThis will be a single blind multi centre randomized control trial with two arms. Seventy subjects post primary total hip arthroplasty will be randomized into either an experimental group (n=35), or to a control group (n=35). The experimental group will attend a functional exercise class twice weekly for a six week period from week 12 to week 18 post surgery. The functional exercise group will follow a circuit based functional exercise class supervised by a chartered Physiotherapist. The control group will receive usual care. The principal investigator (BM) will perform blinded outcome assessments on all patients using validated measures for pain, stiffness, and function using the Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC). This is the primary outcome measurement tool. Secondary outcome measurements include Quality of life (SF-36), 6 min walk test, Visual Analogue Scale, and the Berg Balance score. The WOMAC score will be collated on day five post surgery and repeated at week twelve and week eighteen. All other measurements will be taken at week 12 and repeated at week eighteen. In addition a blinded radiologist will measure gluteus medius cross sectional area using real time ultrasound for all subjects at week 12 and at week 18 to determine if the functional exercise programme has any effect on muscle size.DiscussionThis randomised controlled trial will add to the body of evidence on the relationship between muscle size, functional ability, balance, quality of life and time post surgery in patients following total hip arthroplasty. The CONSORT guidelines will be followed to throughout. Ethical approval has been gained from the Ethics committee Health Services Executive Dublin North East.

Project description:Reduced external knee adduction moments in the second half of stance after total hip replacement have been reported in hip osteoarthritis patients. This reduction is thought to shift the load from the medial to the lateral knee compartment and as such increase the risk for knee osteoarthritis. The knee adduction moment is a surrogate for the load distribution between the medial and lateral compartments of the knee and not a valid measure for the tibiofemoral contact forces which are the result of externally applied forces and muscle forces. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether the distribution of the tibiofemoral contact forces over the knee compartments in unilateral hip osteoarthritis patients 1 year after receiving a primary total hip replacement differs from healthy controls. Musculoskeletal modeling on gait was performed in OpenSim using the detailed knee model of Lerner et al. (2015) for 19 patients as well as for 15 healthy controls of similar age. Knee adduction moments were calculated by the inverse dynamics analysis, medial and lateral tibiofemoral contact forces with the joint reaction force analysis. Moments and contact forces of patients and controls were compared using Statistical Parametric Mapping two-sample t-tests. Knee adduction moments and medial tibiofemoral contact forces of both the ipsi- and contralateral leg were not significantly different compared to healthy controls. The contralateral leg showed 14% higher medial tibiofemoral contact forces compared to the ipsilateral (operated) leg during the second half of stance. During the first half of stance, the lateral tibiofemoral contact force of the contralateral leg was 39% lower and the ratio 32% lower compared to healthy controls. In contrast, during the second half of stance the forces were significantly higher (39 and 26%, respectively) compared to healthy controls. The higher ratio indicates a changed distribution whereas the increased lateral tibiofemoral contact forces indicate a higher lateral knee joint loading in the contralateral leg in OA patients after total hip replacement (THR). Musculoskeletal modeling using a detailed knee model can be useful to detect differences in the load distribution between the medial and lateral knee compartment which cannot be verified with the knee adduction moment.

Project description:Objective To compare the survival of different implant combinations for primary total hip replacement (THR). Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the EU Clinical Trials Register.Review methods Published randomised controlled trials comparing different implant combinations. Implant combinations were defined by bearing surface materials (metal-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-ceramic, or metal-on-metal), head size (large ?36 mm or small <36 mm), and fixation technique (cemented, uncemented, hybrid, or reverse hybrid). Our reference implant combination was metal-on-polyethylene (not highly cross linked), small head, and cemented. The primary outcome was revision surgery at 0-2 years and 2-10 years after primary THR. The secondary outcome was the Harris hip score reported by clinicians.Results 77 studies were included in the systematic review, and 15 studies (3177 hips) in the network meta-analysis for revision. There was no evidence that the risk of revision surgery was reduced by other implant combinations compared with the reference implant combination. Although estimates are imprecise, metal-on-metal, small head, cemented implants (hazard ratio 4.4, 95% credible interval 1.6 to 16.6) and resurfacing (12.1, 2.1 to 120.3) increase the risk of revision at 0-2 years after primary THR compared with the reference implant combination. Similar results were observed for the 2-10 years period. 31 studies (2888 patients) were included in the analysis of Harris hip score. No implant combination had a better score than the reference implant combination.Conclusions Newer implant combinations were not found to be better than the reference implant combination (metal-on-polyethylene (not highly cross linked), small head, cemented) in terms of risk of revision surgery or Harris hip score. Metal-on-metal, small head, cemented implants and resurfacing increased the risk of revision surgery compared with the reference implant combination. The results were consistent with observational evidence and were replicated in sensitivity analysis but were limited by poor reporting across studies.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42015019435.

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about how often patients have revision total hip replacement in the same hospital in which they had the primary procedure.MethodsWe examined Medicare claims data to identify patients who had primary total hip replacement from July 1995 to June 1996 and subsequently had revision through December 31, 2006. We examined whether the revision was performed in the same or different hospital from the primary procedure, with different hospitals being categorized as being in a lower, a higher, or the same hospital volume stratum. Hospital strata included twenty-five or fewer cases of total hip replacement annually in the Medicare population, twenty-six to fifty cases, fifty-one to 100 cases, and >100 cases. We calculated the number of revisions generated (primary procedures eventuating in revision) by hospitals in each volume stratum and the number of revisions performed in these hospitals.ResultsOf 4448 revision procedures, 3306 (74%) were performed in hospitals in the same volume stratum as the hospital where the primary procedure was performed. Four hundred twenty-nine revisions (9.6%) were performed in a lower-volume hospital, and 713 (16%) were performed in a higher-volume hospital. Thirty-one (3%) of 960 patients who had revision within one year after the primary total hip replacement had the revision in a lower-volume center, compared with 204 (15%) of 1393 who had revision more than six years after the primary procedure (odds ratio = 4.6 ; 95% confidence interval, 3.0 to 6.8). The ratio of revisions performed to revisions generated was 1.21 for the highest-volume centers and 0.86 for the lowest-volume centers.ConclusionsOf 4448 revisions examined in this study, 429 (<10%) were performed in centers with a lower volume of total hip replacement than the center at which the initial hip replacement was performed, whereas 713 (16%) were performed in higher-volume centers. Higher-volume centers performed 21% more revisions than they generated (531 revisions performed, compared with 438 generated). These data will help to inform health-care policy with regard to the utilization of resources for revision total hip replacement.

Dataset Information

Control strategies to prevent total hip replacement-related infections: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Control strategies to prevent total hip replacement-related infections: a systematic review and mixed treatment comparison.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets