Perspective of potential patients on the hospital volume-outcome relationship and the minimum volume threshold for total knee arthroplasty: a qualitative focus group and interview study

Provision of revision knee arthroplasty services across Scotland: A national audit

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that both low surgeon and centre case volumes are associated with poorer outcomes following Revision Knee Arthroplasty (rTKA). Given the unique challenges faced in Scotland relating to funding and geography, understanding details on the complexity of cases is required to guide development of future rTKA services.

METHODS

Utilising the Scottish Collaborative Orthopaedic Trainee Research Network (SCOTnet) a retrospective review of all Scottish 2019 rTKA cases was undertaken. Regional leads co-ordinated local data collection using individual case note review. The number of cases performed by regions, hospitals and individual surgeons were identified. Patient demographics and case complexity (Revision Knee Complexity Classification [RKCC]) were also collected. Results were compared against current standards.

RESULTS

17 units performed rTKA, delivered by 77 surgeons. A total of 506 cases were included. The mean age was 69 years (46% male). Revision for infection accounted for 147/506 (29%) cases. Extensor compromise was present in 35/506 (7%) and 11/506 (2%) required soft tissue reconstruction. According to the RKCC - 214/503 (43%) were classified as R1 (Less complex cases), 228/503 (45%) R2 (complex cases), and 61/503 (12%) R3 (most complex / salvage cases). 5/17 (29%) units met current national guidelines for case volume/year, with only 11/77 (14%) surgeons meeting recommended individual case volumes. 37/77 (48%) surgeons performed ≤ 2 cases per year.

CONCLUSIONS

Most individual centre volumes could be increased by re-organising services or locations providing rTKA within a region. This should provide better access to Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) involvement. We recorded a significant number of very low volume surgeons (≤2 year) that is contradictory to current evidence-based practice.

Social Vulnerability and Appendicitis: Single-Institution Study in a High Insurance State

INTRODUCTION

Multiple factors signifying higher social vulnerability, including lower socioeconomic status and minority race, have been associated with presentation with complicated appendicitis (CA). In this study, we compared the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) of our population by appendicitis severity (uncomplicated appendicitis [UA] versus CA). We hypothesized that SVI would be similar between patients with UA and CA presenting to our institution, a safety-net hospital in a state with high healthcare insurance coverage.

METHODS

We included all patients at our hospital aged 18 y and older who underwent appendectomy for acute appendicitis between 2012 and 2016. SVI values were determined based on the 2010 census data using ArcMap software. We used nonparametric univariate statistics to compare the SVI of patients with CA versus UA and multivariable regression to model the likelihood of operative CA.

RESULTS

A total of 997 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 177 had CA. The median composite SVI score for patients with CA was lower than for patients with UA (80% versus 83%, P = 0.004). UA was associated with higher socioeconomic (83% versus 80%, P = 0.007), household/disability (68% versus 55%, P = 0.037), and minority/language SVI scores (91% versus 89%, P = 0.037). On multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, insurance status, relevant comorbidities, and chronicity of symptoms, there was an inverse association between SVI and the likelihood of CA (odds ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.4-0.87, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of high healthcare insurance and a medical center experienced in caring for vulnerable populations, patients presenting with UA have a higher composite SVI, and thus greater social vulnerability, than patients presenting with CA.

Hospital volume-outcome relationship in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis aimed to investigate the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL were searched up to February 2020 for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that reported TKA performed in hospitals with at least two different volumes and any associated patient-relevant outcomes. The adjusted effect estimates (odds ratios, OR) were pooled using a random-effects, linear dose-response meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I²-statistic. ROBINS-I and the GRADE approach were used to assess the risk of bias and the confidence in the cumulative evidence, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 68 cohort studies with data from 1985 to 2018 were included. The risk of bias for all outcomes ranged from moderate to critical. Higher hospital volume may be associated with a lower rate of early revision ≤ 12 months (narrative synthesis of k = 7 studies, n = 301,378 patients) and is likely associated with lower mortality ≤ 3 months (OR = 0.91 per additional 50 TKAs/year, 95% confidence interval [0.87-0.95], k = 9, n = 2,638,996, I² = 51%) and readmissions ≤ 3 months (OR = 0.98 [0.97-0.99], k = 3, n = 830,381, I² = 44%). Hospital volume may not be associated with the rates of deep infections within 1-4 years, late revision (1-10 years) or adverse events ≤ 3 months. The confidence in the cumulative evidence was moderate for mortality and readmission rates; low for early revision rates; and very low for deep infection, late revision and adverse event rates.

CONCLUSION

An inverse volume-outcome relationship probably exists for some TKA outcomes, including mortality and readmissions, and may exist for early revisions. Small reductions in unfavourable outcomes may be clinically relevant at the population level, supporting centralisation of TKA to high-volume hospitals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42019131209 available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=131209 ).