Dataset Information

Pain and Function Recovery Trajectories following Revision Hip Arthroplasty: Short-Term Changes and Comparison with Primary Hip Arthroplasty in the ADAPT Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background and purpose

Patients report similar or better pain and function before revision hip arthroplasty than before primary arthroplasty but worse results are reported after revision surgery than after primary surgery. The trajectory of post-operative recovery during the first months and any differences by type of surgery have received little attention. We explored the trajectories of change in pain and function after revision hip arthroplasty to 12-months post-operatively and compare them with those observed after primary hip arthroplasty.

Methods

This study is a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing primary (n = 80 with 92% for an indication of osteoarthritis) and revision (n = 43) hip arthroplasties. WOMAC pain and function scores and walking speed were collected pre-operatively, at 3 and 12-months post-operatively. Multilevel regression models were used to chart and compare the trajectories of change (0-3 months and 3-12 months) between types of surgery.

Results

The improvements in pain and function following revision arthroplasty occurred within the first 3-months with no evidence of further change beyond this initial period. While the pattern of recovery was similar to the one observed after primary arthroplasty, improvements in the first 3-months were smaller after revision compared to primary arthroplasty. Patients listed for revision surgery reported lower pre-operative pain levels but similar post-operative levels compared to those undergoing primary surgery. At 12-months post-operation patients who underwent a revision arthroplasty had not reached the same level of function achieved by those who underwent primary arthroplasty.

Conclusion

The post-operative improvements in pain and function are larger following primary hip arthroplasty than following revision hip arthroplasty. Irrespectively of surgery type, most of the improvements occur in the first three post-operative months. More research is required to identify whether the recovery following revision surgery could be improved with specific post-operative interventions.

SUBMITTER: Lenguerrand E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5065160 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Pain and Function Recovery Trajectories following Revision Hip Arthroplasty: Short-Term Changes and Comparison with Primary Hip Arthroplasty in the ADAPT Cohort Study.

Lenguerrand Erik E Whitehouse Michael R MR Wylde Vikki V Gooberman-Hill Rachael R Blom Ashley W AW

PloS one 20161014 10

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Patients report similar or better pain and function before revision hip arthroplasty than before primary arthroplasty but worse results are reported after revision surgery than after primary surgery. The trajectory of post-operative recovery during the first months and any differences by type of surgery have received little attention. We explored the trajectories of change in pain and function after revision hip arthroplasty to 12-months post-operatively and compar ...[more]

PMID: 27741321

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Peripheral nerve injury (PNI) following revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) can be a devastating complication. This study assessed the frequency of and risk factors for postoperative PNI following rTHA. Methods: Patients who underwent rTHA from 2003 to 2015 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Demographics, medical history, surgical details, and complications were compared between patients who sustained a PNI and those who did not, to identify risk factors for the development of PNI after rTHA. Results: Overall, 112,310 patients who underwent rTHA were identified, 929 (0.83%) of whom sustained a PNI. Univariate analysis found that younger patients (p < 0.0001), females (p = 0.025), and those with a history of flexion contracture (0.65% vs. 0.22%, p = 0.005), hip dislocation (24.0% vs. 18.0%, p < 0.001), and spine conditions (4.8% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.001) had significantly higher rates of PNI. In-hospital complications associated with PNI included postoperative hematoma (2.6% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.0001), postoperative seroma (0.75% vs. 0.30%, p = 0.011), superficial wound dehiscence (0.65% vs. 0.23%, p = 0.008), and postoperative anemia (36.1% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.007). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a history of pre-existing spine conditions (aOR: 1.7; 95%-CI: 1.3-2.4, p < 0.001), prior dislocation (aOR 1.5; 95%-CI: 1.3-1.7, p < 0.001), postoperative anemia (aOR 1.2; 95%-CI: 1.0-1.4, p = 0.01), and hematoma (aOR 2.1; 95%-CI: 1.4-3.2, p < 0.001) were associated with increased risk for PNI. Conclusions: Our findings align with the existing literature, affirming that sciatic nerve injury is the prevailing neuropathic complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Furthermore, we observed a 0.83% incidence of PNI following rTHA and identified pre-existing spine conditions, prior hip dislocation, postoperative anemia, or hematoma as risk factors. Orthopedic surgeons may use this information to guide their discussion of PNI following rTHA, especially in high-risk patients.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess cost-effectiveness of enhanced recovery pathways following total hip and knee arthroplasties. Secondary objectives were to report on quality of studies and identify research gaps for future work. DESIGN:Systematic review of cost-utility analyses. DATA SOURCES:Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the National Health Service Economic Evaluations Database and EconLit, January 2000 to August 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:English-language peer-reviewed cost-utility analyses of enhanced recovery pathways, or components of one, compared with usual care, in patients having total hip or knee arthroplasties for osteoarthritis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:Data extracted by three reviewers with disagreements resolved by a fourth. Study quality assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list, the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research and Assessment of the Validation Status of Health-Economic decision models tools; for trial-based studies the Cochrane Collaboration's tool to assess risk of bias. No quantitative synthesis was undertaken. RESULTS:We identified 17 studies: five trial-based and 12 model-based studies. Two analyses evaluated entire enhanced recovery pathways and reported them to be cost-effective compared with usual care. Ten pathway components were more effective and cost-saving compared with usual care, three were cost-effective, and two were not cost-effective. We had concerns around risk of bias for all included studies, particularly regarding the short time horizon of the trials and lack of reporting of model validation. CONCLUSIONS:Consistent results supported enhanced recovery pathways as a whole, prophylactic systemic antibiotics, antibiotic-impregnated cement and conventional ventilation for infection prevention. No other interventions were subject of more than one study. We found ample scope for future cost-effectiveness studies, particularly analyses of entire recovery pathways and comparison of incremental changes within pathways. A key limitation is that standard practices have changed over the period covered by the included studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017059473.

Dataset Information

Pain and Function Recovery Trajectories following Revision Hip Arthroplasty: Short-Term Changes and Comparison with Primary Hip Arthroplasty in the ADAPT Cohort Study.

Background and purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Pain and Function Recovery Trajectories following Revision Hip Arthroplasty: Short-Term Changes and Comparison with Primary Hip Arthroplasty in the ADAPT Cohort Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets