Patients Discharged to Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities Undergo More Diagnostic Interventions With No Improvement in Outcomes

Postoperative Inpatient Rehabilitation Does Not Increase Knee Function after Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Inpatient rehabilitation (IR) is a common postoperative protocol after total knee replacement (TKA). Because IR is expensive and should therefore be justified, this study determined the difference in knee function one year after TKA in patients treated with IR or outpatient rehabilitation, fast-track rehabilitation (FTR) in particular, which also entails a reduced hospital length of stay. A total of 205 patients were included in this multi-center prospective cohort study. Of the patients, 104 had primary TKA at a German university hospital and received IR, while 101 had primary TKA at a Canadian university hospital and received FTR. Patients receiving IR or FTR were matched by pre-operative demographics and knee function. Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and EuroQol visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) determined knee function one year after surgery. Patients receiving IR had a 2.8-point lower improvement in OKS (p = 0.001), a 6.7-point lower improvement in WOMAC (p = 0.063), and a 12.3-point higher improvement in EQ-VAS (p = 0.281) than patients receiving FTR. IR does not provide long-term benefits to patient recovery after primary uncomplicated TKA under the current rehabilitation regime.

Postoperative venous thromboembolism event increases risk of readmissions and reoperation following total joint arthroplasty: a propensity-matched cohort study

PURPOSE

The clinical impact of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) remains unclear. In this study, we evaluate the effect of VTE following TJA on postoperative outcomes including discharge disposition, readmission rates, and revision rates.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients over the age of 18 who underwent primary, elective THA or TKA between 2013 and 2020. Patients were stratified into two cohorts based on whether or not they had a VTE following their procedure. Baseline patient demographics and clinical outcomes such as readmissions and revisions were collected. Propensity score matching was performed to limit significant demographic differences, while independent sample t-tests and Pearson's chi-squared test were used to compare outcomes of interest between the groups.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there were 109 patients in each cohort, representing a total of 218 patients for the matched comparison. Prior to matching, the VTE cohort was noted to have a significantly higher BMI than the non-VTE cohort (32.22 ± 6.27 vs 30.93 ± 32.04 kg/m², p = 0.032). All other patient demographics were similar. Compared to the non-VTE cohort, the VTE cohort was less likely to be discharged home (66.1% vs 80.7%; p = 0.021), had a higher rate of 90-day all-cause readmissions (27.5% vs 9.2%, p = 0.001), and a higher two-year revision rate (11.0% vs 0.9%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Patients with postoperative VTE were less likely to be discharged home and had higher 90-day readmission and two-year revision rates. Therefore, mitigating perioperative risk factors, initiating appropriate long-term anticoagulation, and maintaining close follow-up for patients with postoperative VTE may play significant roles in decreasing hospital costs and the economic burden to the healthcare system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Retrospective Cohort Study.

Establishing a patient centered, outpatient total joint home recovery program within an integrated healthcare system

Outpatient total joint home recovery (HR) is a rapidly growing initiative being developed and employed at high volume orthopedic centers. Minimally invasive surgery, improved pain control and home health services have made HR possible. Multidisciplinary teams with members ranging from surgeons and anesthesiologists to hospital administrators, physical therapists, nurses and research analysts are necessary for success. Eligibility criteria for outpatient total joint arthroplasty will vary between medical centers. Surgeon preference in addition to medical comorbidities, social support, preoperative patient mobility and safety of the HR location are all factors to consider when selecting patients for outpatient total joint HR. As additional knowledge is gained, the next steps will be to establish 'best practices' and speciality society-endorsed guidelines for patients undergoing outpatient total joint arthroplasty.

The Efficacy and Safety of Inpatient Rehabilitation Compared With Home Discharge After Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Total hip and knee arthroplasties (THKAs) are successful procedures in managing end-stage arthritis when nonoperative treatments fail. The immediate postoperative period is an important time for the body to recuperate and rehabilitate. Studies have shown that early intensive rehabilitation can enhance recovery. Rehabilitation can be provided as inpatient rehabilitation (IR) or discharge with home rehabilitation. These options have been studied, but literature on the efficacy and safety of IR compared to home discharge is scarce, and evidence is not well established. This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of IR to home discharge with rehabilitation after THKA.

METHODS

A multidatabase search was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Data from studies assessing the efficacy and safety of IR and home as discharge destinations after THKA were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included, consisting of 37,411 IR patients and 172,219 home discharge patients. These studies had heterogeneous reporting methods, with some conflicting results. There was no clinically significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups. Readmission was nearly 5 times (odds ratio = 4.87, 95% confidence interval = 3.24-7.33, P < .001) and periprosthetic complications nearly 3 times (odds ratio = 2.82, 95% confidence interval: 1.54-5.24, P < .001) higher in IR patients than those discharged home after THKA.

CONCLUSION

Although IR is associated with higher risks of complications and readmissions, this may be because of patient selection bias in the clinical setting. Following THKA, it is safe to discharge patients to home with rehabilitation whenever possible.

EVIDENCE LEVEL

Level II, Meta-analysis of heterogeneous studies.

Variation in rehabilitation setting after uncomplicated total knee or hip arthroplasty: a call for evidence-based guidelines

Background

High-level evidence consistently indicates that resource-intensive facility-based rehabilitation does not provide better recovery compared to home programs for uncomplicated knee or hip arthroplasty patients and, therefore, could be reserved for those most impaired. This study aimed to determine if rehabilitation setting aligns with evidence regardless of insurance status.

Methods

Sub-study within a national, prospective study involving 19 Australian high-volume public and private arthroplasty centres. Individuals undergoing primary arthroplasty for osteoarthritis participated. The main outcome was the proportion participating in each rehabilitation setting, obtained via chart review and participant telephone follow-up at 35 and 90 days post-surgery, categorised as ‘facility-based’ (inpatient rehabilitation and/or ≥ four outpatient-based sessions, including day-hospital) or ‘home-based’ (domiciliary, monitored or unmonitored home program only). We compared characteristics of the study cohort and rehabilitation setting by insurance status (public or private) using parametric and non-parametric tests, analysing the knee and hip cohorts separately.

Results

After excluding ineligible participants (bilateral surgeries, self-funded insurance, participation in a concurrent rehabilitation trial, experience of a major acute complication potentially affecting their rehabilitation pathway), 1334 eligible participants remained. Complete data were available for 1302 (97%) [Knee: n = 610, mean age 68.7 (8.5) yr., 51.1% female; Hip: n = 692, mean age 65.5 (10.4) yr., 48.9% female]; 26% (158/610) of knee and 61% (423/692) of hip participants participated predominantly in home-based programs. A greater proportion of public recipients were obese and had greater pre-operative joint impairment, but participated more commonly in home programs [(Knee: 32.9% (79/240) vs 21.4% (79/370) (P = 0.001); Hip: 71.0% (176/248) vs 55.6% (247/444) (P <  0.001)], less commonly in inpatient rehabilitation [Knee: 7.5% (18/240) vs 56.0% (207/370) P (< 0.001); Hip: 4.4% (11/248) vs 33.1% (147/444) (P <  0.001], and had fewer outpatient treatments [Knee: median (IQR) 6 (3) vs 8 (6) (P < 0.001); Hip: 6 (4) vs 8 (6) (P < 0.001)].

Conclusions

Facility-based programs remain the norm for most knee and many hip arthroplasty recipients with insurance status being a major determinant of care. Development and implementation of evidence-based guidelines may help resolve the evidence-practice gap, addressing unwarranted practice variation across the insurance sectors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2570-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.