John C Clohisy1, Ganesh V Kamath, Gregory D Byrd, Karen Steger-May, Rick W Wright. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital at Washington University School of Medicine, One Barnes-Hospital Plaza, Suite 11300 West Pavilion, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA. jclohisy@msnotes.wustl.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Periodic clinical and radiographic evaluation is commonly recommended by orthopaedic surgeons to monitor patients following total joint arthroplasty, yet the compliance with and efficacy of patient follow-up protocols have not been well defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient compliance with early clinical follow-up after total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of clinical follow-up compliance for 776 patients who had undergone a total joint arthroplasty in the lower extremity. This cohort included 505 total hip arthroplasties (372 primary and 133 revision procedures) and 271 total knee arthroplasties (195 primary and seventy-six revision procedures). The patients were given one-time verbal instructions by the treating surgeon at the three-month postoperative visit to return for the one-year follow-up evaluation. At the one-year follow-up evaluation, those who returned were once again verbally instructed to return a year later. Demographic factors, functional hip and knee scores, and follow-up compliance at one and two years after surgery were assessed. RESULTS: Patient compliance with clinical follow-up after all arthroplasties was 61% at one year and 36% at two years. With use of a multivariate model for patients who had total hip arthroplasty, the analyses showed that a revision hip procedure (p = 0.006), younger patient age (p = 0.04), and a higher preoperative Harris hip score for gait (p = 0.04) were associated with follow-up compliance at two years. Of the factors analyzed for patients who had total knee arthroplasty, only nonwhite race (p = 0.03) was found to be a positive predictor of follow-up compliance at the two-year follow-up interval. CONCLUSIONS: Patient compliance with clinical follow-up after total joint arthroplasty in response to a verbal request made by the surgeon once at three months and once at one year postoperatively was poor in this series. These data indicate that this method (one-time verbal instruction) is insufficient to ensure compliance for follow-up after total joint arthroplasty.
BACKGROUND: Periodic clinical and radiographic evaluation is commonly recommended by orthopaedic surgeons to monitor patients following total joint arthroplasty, yet the compliance with and efficacy of patient follow-up protocols have not been well defined. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient compliance with early clinical follow-up after total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of clinical follow-up compliance for 776 patients who had undergone a total joint arthroplasty in the lower extremity. This cohort included 505 total hip arthroplasties (372 primary and 133 revision procedures) and 271 total knee arthroplasties (195 primary and seventy-six revision procedures). The patients were given one-time verbal instructions by the treating surgeon at the three-month postoperative visit to return for the one-year follow-up evaluation. At the one-year follow-up evaluation, those who returned were once again verbally instructed to return a year later. Demographic factors, functional hip and knee scores, and follow-up compliance at one and two years after surgery were assessed. RESULTS:Patient compliance with clinical follow-up after all arthroplasties was 61% at one year and 36% at two years. With use of a multivariate model for patients who had total hip arthroplasty, the analyses showed that a revision hip procedure (p = 0.006), younger patient age (p = 0.04), and a higher preoperative Harris hip score for gait (p = 0.04) were associated with follow-up compliance at two years. Of the factors analyzed for patients who had total knee arthroplasty, only nonwhite race (p = 0.03) was found to be a positive predictor of follow-up compliance at the two-year follow-up interval. CONCLUSIONS:Patient compliance with clinical follow-up after total joint arthroplasty in response to a verbal request made by the surgeon once at three months and once at one year postoperatively was poor in this series. These data indicate that this method (one-time verbal instruction) is insufficient to ensure compliance for follow-up after total joint arthroplasty.
Authors: Susan W Muir; Aziz Al-Ahaideb; John Huckell; Mary Ann Johnson; D Bill C Johnston; Lauren A Beaupre Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Jeffrey B Stambough; Gail Pashos; Frank C Bohnenkamp; William J Maloney; John M Martell; John C Clohisy Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2015-07-17 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Joshua T Carothers; Richard E White; Krishna R Tripuraneni; Mohammad W Hattab; Michael J Archibeck Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: James A Keeney; Ryan M Nunley; Rick W Wright; Robert L Barrack; John C Clohisy Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2013-11-19 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Colin K Cantrell; Harshadkumar A Patel; Wesley R Stroud; Nicholas Dahlgren; Eva Lehtonen; Morad Qarmali; Kelly C Stéfani; Ashish Shah; Sameer M Naranje Journal: Cureus Date: 2018-06-13
Authors: Bill Reynolds; Nick Maister; Stephen D Gill; Shaun Waring; Peter Schoch; Sally Beattie; Andrew Thomson; Richard S Page Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 2.362