Dataset Information

Impact of comorbid conditions on outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: To systematically perform a meta-analysis of the association between different comorbid conditions on safety (short-term outcomes) and effectiveness (long-term outcomes) in patients undergoing hip and knee replacement surgery.Systematic review and meta-analysis.Medline, Embase and CINAHL Plus were searched up to May 2017. We included all studies that reported data to allow the calculation of a pooled OR for the impact of 11 comorbid conditions on 10 outcomes (including surgical complications, readmissions, mortality, function, health-related quality of life, pain and revision surgery). The quality of included studies was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Continuous outcomes were converted to ORs using the Hasselblad and Hedges approach. Results were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis.The primary outcome was the adjusted OR for the impact of each 11 comorbid condition on each of the 10 outcomes compared with patients without the comorbid condition. Where the adjusted OR was not available the secondary outcome was the crude OR.70 studies were included with 16 (23%) reporting on at least 100?000 patients and 9 (13%) were of high quality. We found that comorbidities increased the short-term risk of hospital readmissions (8 of 11 conditions) and mortality (8 of 11 conditions). The impact on surgical complications was inconsistent across comorbid conditions. In the long term, comorbid conditions increased the risk of revision surgery (6 of 11 conditions) and long-term mortality (7 of 11 conditions). The long-term impact on function, quality of life and pain varied across comorbid conditions.This systematic review shows that comorbidities predominantly have an impact on the safety of hip and knee replacement surgery but little impact on its effectiveness. There is a need for high-quality studies also considering the severity of comorbid conditions.

SUBMITTER: Podmore B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6082478 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of comorbid conditions on outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Podmore Bélène B Hutchings Andrew A van der Meulen Jan J Aggarwal Ajay A Konan Sujith S

BMJ open 20180711 7

<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically perform a meta-analysis of the association between different comorbid conditions on safety (short-term outcomes) and effectiveness (long-term outcomes) in patients undergoing hip and knee replacement surgery.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review and meta-analysis.<h4>Methods</h4>Medline, Embase and CINAHL Plus were searched up to May 2017. We included all studies that reported data to allow the calculation of a pooled OR for the impact of 11 comorbid conditions on ...[more]

PMID: 29997141

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA patient-engagement and pathway-management program for patients undergoing primary total hip and knee replacement was evaluated. Health-service and multimedia features supported by technology were integrated with existing enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) practices. The primary objective was to demonstrate the impact on length of stay. The secondary objective was to assess the impact on clinical, patient-focused, and financial outcomes.MethodsTwo thousand and eighty consecutive patients undergoing primary total hip replacement (n = 1,034) and total knee replacement (n = 1,046) were classified into "pre-program" (retrospectively assessed [n = 1,038]) and "program" (prospectively assessed [n = 1,042]) cohorts. Patients in the program cohort were subdivided according to those who were eligible for criteria-based outreach support (OS) (n = 401) and those who were ineligible for this service (NOS) (n = 641). Clinical outcomes were assessed for all patients, and patient-focused outcomes were assessed for a subset (n = 223).ResultsThe mean reduction in length of stay ranged from 20% (1.2 days) to 42% (2.5 days) following total hip replacement and from 9% (0.6 day) to 31% (2 days) following total knee replacement (p < 0.001). Clinical outcomes (readmissions, complications, emergency department re-attendance rates) were not significantly negatively impacted. The Oxford Hip Score had numerically larger improvement after total hip replacement in the OS group than in the pre-program group (4.1-point increase), and the Oxford Knee Score had numerically larger improvement after total knee replacement in the NOS group than in the pre-program group (0.8-point increase). The patients in the program cohort (either OS or NOS) rated overall health gain as higher than those in the pre-program cohort (gain in numerical rating scale, 1.4 points for patients managed with total hip replacement, 0.6 points for patients managed with total knee replacement). Older patients and those with higher comorbidity indices benefited most with respect to length of stay and multiple clinical outcomes. Patient experience was significantly improved across domains (p < 0.001 to p = 0.003). Potential savings for patients managed with total hip replacement (£401.64 [$267.76] per patient) exceeded estimated program charges of £50 [$33.33] to £60 [$40] per patient, whereas the potential savings for patients managed with total knee replacement (£76.67 [$51.11] per patient) were sufficient to achieve a reduction of total system costs.ConclusionsTechnology-enabled programs may deliver enhanced care at lower costs for patients undergoing lower-limb arthroplasty. Shorter durations of inpatient stay without a negative impact on clinical outcomes and improved patient-focused outcomes and experience can deliver substantial value that can be especially beneficial for older patients and those with greater medical complexity.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:IntroductionPrevious evidence has established that early surgery is beneficial to improve outcomes for individuals with native hip fractures in the elderly population. Patients who sustain a periprosthetic fracture have been demonstrated to have similar demographics and outcomes as those with native fractures around the hip and knee. We therefore set out to determine if there is a similar difference in perioperative outcomes between early and delayed surgery for periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee through a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsLiterature search outputs were screened for studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The groups of early surgery and delayed surgery were defined by study authors. The primary outcome measure was 30 day mortality. Where there was sufficient study homogeneity, a random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Individual study risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I criteria, with the GRADE criteria used for independent outcome evaluation. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO prior to commencement (Registration number CRD42019149360).ResultsThe inclusion criteria was met in 11 studies (n = 3006). Mean time to surgery from admission for reporting studies was 64 h. 59.6% patients underwent early surgery as defined by the study authors. We identified a significantly lower risk of 30 day mortality for those with early surgery versus delayed surgery (RR 0.21; 95% CI 0.05, 0.90; p = 0.04, n = 2022). There were also significantly better outcomes for early versus delayed surgery regarding: medical complications, length of stay, transfusion risk, and reoperation. The quality of evidence for all the individual outcomes was low or very low.ConclusionsThere is evidence that delaying surgery in those with periprosthetic fractures of the hip and knee has a deleterious impact on mortality and other important patient outcomes. There are, however, notable limitations to the existing available literature, with further appropriately designed large-scale studies required to confirm these findings.

Project description:BackgroundPatients undergoing hip or knee replacement are at high risk of developing a postoperative venous thromboembolism even after discharge from hospital. We sought to identify hospital and patient characteristics associated with receiving thromboprophylaxis after discharge and to compare the risk of short-term mortality among those who did or did not receive thromboprophylaxis.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study using system-wide hospital discharge summary records, physician billing information, medication reimbursement claims and demographic records. We included patients aged 65 years and older who received a hip or knee replacement and who were discharged home after surgery.ResultsIn total we included 10 744 patients. Of these, 7058 patients who received a hip replacement and 3686 who received a knee replacement. The mean age was 75.4 (standard deviation [SD] 6.8) years and 38% of patients were men. In total, 2059 (19%) patients received thomboprophylaxis at discharge. Patients discharged from university teaching hospitals were less likely than those discharged from community hospitals to received thromboprophylaxis after discharge (odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.00). Patients were less likely to receive thromboprophylaxis after discharge if they had a longer hospital stay (15-30 days v. 1-7 days, OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.59-0.81). Patients were more likely to receive thromboprophylaxis if they had hip (v. knee) replacement, osteoarthritis, heart failure, atrial fibrillation or hypertension, higher (v. lower) income or if they were treated at medium-volume hospitals (69-116 hip and knee replacements per year). In total, 223 patients (2%) died in the 3-month period after discharge. The risk of short-term mortality was lower among those who received thromboprophylaxis after discharge (hazard ratio [HR] 0.34, 95% CI 0.20-0.57).InterpretationFewer than 1 in 5 elderly patients discharged home after a hip-or knee-replacement surgery received postdischarge thromboprophylaxis. Those prescribed these medications had a lower risk of short-term mortality. The benefits of and barriers to thromboprophylaxis therapy after discharge in this population requires further study.

Project description:ObjectiveTo present a clear and comprehensive summary of the published data on unicompartmental knee replacement (UKA) or total knee replacement (TKA), comparing domains of outcome that have been shown to be important to patients and clinicians to allow informed decision making.DesignSystematic review using data from randomised controlled trials, nationwide databases or joint registries, and large cohort studies.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), and Clinical Trials.gov, searched between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 2018.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesStudies published in the past 20 years, comparing outcomes of primary UKA with TKA in adult patients. Studies were excluded if they involved fewer than 50 participants, or if translation into English was not available.Results60 eligible studies were separated into three methodological groups: seven publications from six randomised controlled trials, 17 national joint registries and national database studies, and 36 cohort studies. Results for each domain of outcome varied depending on the level of data, and findings were not always significant. Analysis of the three groups of studies showed significantly shorter hospital stays after UKA than after TKA (-1.20 days (95% confidence interval -1.67 to -0.73), -1.43 (-1.53 to -1.33), and -1.73 (-2.30 to -1.16), respectively). There was no significant difference in pain, based on patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), but significantly better functional PROM scores for UKA than for TKA in both non-trial groups (mean difference -0.58 (-0.88 to -0.27) and -0.32 (-0.48 to -0.15), respectively). Regarding major complications, trials and cohort studies had non-significant results, but mortality after TKA was significantly higher in registry and large database studies (risk ratio 0.27 (0.16 to 0.45)), as were venous thromboembolic events (0.39 (0.27 to 0.57)) and major cardiac events (0.22 (0.06 to 0.86)). Early reoperation for any reason was higher after TKA than after UKA, but revision rates at five years remained higher for UKA in all three study groups (risk ratio 5.95 (1.29 to 27.59), 2.50 (1.77 to 3.54), and 3.13 (1.89 to 5.17), respectively).ConclusionsTKA and UKA are both viable options for the treatment of isolated unicompartmental osteoarthritis. By directly comparing the two treatments, this study demonstrates better results for UKA in several outcome domains. However, the risk of revision surgery was lower for TKA. This information should be available to patients as part of the shared decision making process in choosing treatment options.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO number CRD42018089972.

Dataset Information

Impact of comorbid conditions on outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Impact of comorbid conditions on outcomes of hip and knee replacement surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets