3.9 Article

The burden of arthroscopy of the knee A CONTEMPORARY ANALYSIS OF DATA FROM THE ENGLISH NHS

Journal

JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME
Volume 93B, Issue 10, Pages 1327-1333

Publisher

BRITISH EDITORIAL SOC BONE JOINT SURGERY
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B10.27078

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Arthroscopy of the knee is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic procedures worldwide. Large-volume outcome data have not previously been available for English NHS patients. Prospectively collected admissions data, routinely collected on every English NHS patient, were analysed to determine the rates of complications within 30 days (including re-operation and re-admission), 90-day symptomatic venous thromboembolism and all-cause mortality. There were 301 701 operations performed between 2005 and 2010 - an annual incidence of 9.9 per 10 000 English population. Of these, 16 552 (6%) underwent ligament reconstruction and 106 793 (35%) underwent meniscal surgery. The 30-day re-admission rate was 0.64% (1662) and 30-day wound complication rate was 0.26% (677). The overall 30-day re-operation rate was 0.40% (1033) and the 90-day pulmonary embolism rate was 0.08% (230), of which six patients died. 90-day mortality was 0.02% (47). Age < 40 years, male gender and ligament reconstruction were significantly associated with an increased rate of 30-day re-admission and unplanned re-operation. In addition, a significant increase in 30-day admission rates were seen with Charlson comorbidity scores of 1 (p = 0.037) and >= 2 (p < 0.001) compared with scores of 0, and medium volume units compared with high volume units (p < 0.001). Complications following arthroscopy of the knee are rare. It is a safe procedure, which in the majority of cases is performed as day case surgery. These data can be used for quality benchmarking, in terms of consent, consultant re-validation and individual unit performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available