Abstract. Background: To assess using a retrospective case control study, whether patients undergoing primary, elective total hip or knee arthroplasty who receive blood transfusion have a higher rate of post-operative infection compared to those who do not.Materials and Methods: Data on elective primary total hip or knee arthroplasty patients, including patient characteristics, co-morbidities, type and duration of surgery, blood transfusion, deep and superficial infection was extracted from the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI). Logistic regression analysis was used to compare deep infection and superficial infection in blood-transfused and non-transfused cohorts.Results: Of the 27892 patients identified, 3098 (11.1%) received blood transfusion (TKA 9.7%; THA 13.1%). Overall, the rate of superficial infection (SI) was 0.5% and deep infection (DI) was 1.1%. The infection rates in the transfused cohort were SI 1.0% and DI 1.6%, and in the non-transfused cohort were SI 0.5% and DI 1.0%. The transfused cohort had an increased risk of superficial infection (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.9 [95% CI 1.2-2.9, p-value 0.005]) as well as deep infection (adjusted OR 1.6 [95% CI 1.1-2.2, p-value 0.008]).Conclusion: The odds of superficial and deep wound infection are significantly increased in primary, elective total hip and knee arthroplasty patients who receive blood transfusion compared to those who did not. This study can potentially help in reducing periprosthetic hip or knee infections.
Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) offers an effective method of pain relief and restoration of function for patients with end-stage arthritis. The anterior approach (AA) claims to benefit patients with decreased pain, increased mobilisation and decreasing length of hospital stay (LOS). In a socialised healthcare platform we questioned whether the AA, compared to posterior (PA) and lateral (LA) approaches, can decrease the cost burden. Methods: Using a retrospective matched cohort study, we matched 69 AA patients to 69 LA and 69 PA patients for age ( p = 0.99), gender ( p = 0.99) and number of pre-surgical risk factors ( p = 0.99). First, we used the Resource Intensity Weights (RIW) using the Health Services agreed on method of calculating cost. Secondly, micro-costing analysis was performed using the financial services data for each patient’s hospital stay. Results: Using the RIW based cost analysis and 2-day reduction (95% CI 1.8–2.4) in LOS, the AA offers an estimated savings per case of $4099 ( p < 0.001) compared to the LA and PA. Using micro-costing analysis, we found a total saving of $1858.00 per case (95% CI 1391–2324) when comparing the AA to the PA and LA. There was a statistically significant cost savings using every category: Net Direct Salary ($901.00, p < 0.001), Net Drug ($8.00, p = 0.003), Patient Supply ($454.00, p = 0.001), Patient Drug ($15.00, p = 0.008), Indirect Cost ($385.00, p < 0.001), Patient Care Administration ($106.00, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the AA saved 142 minutes of in-hospital rehabilitation time. Conclusion: The AA THA provides statistically significant reductions in cost compared to PA and LA while releasing rehabilitation resources.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.