Hip & pelvis · 2026
Trends and Outcomes in Outpatient Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Matched Cohort Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lin Claire, Singh Manjot, Nassar Joseph E, Liu Jonathan, Daniels Alan H, Cohen Eric M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Due to recent shifts in healthcare reimbursement models, more primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) are now being performed in the outpatient setting. However, there is a lack of knowledge around the comparative outcomes of revision outpatient THA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults undergoing revision THA between 2010 and 2020 with 2-year follow-up data were identified on a large insurance claims database. Following stratification by inpatient versus outpatient revision THA, patients from both groups were matched 1:1 by demographics and revision characteristics. Ninety-day postoperative medical and 1- and 2-year postoperative surgical complications after matching were compared.
RESULTS: Among 67,570 patients, mean age was 65.3 years, 57.0% were female, and mean Charlson comorbidity index score was 1.72. Subsequent to 1:1 matching, 1,555 inpatient and outpatient revision THA patients were identified. Outpatient THA patients had significantly lower rates of blood transfusions (3.6% vs 5.1%, P=0.049), broken prosthesis (1 year: 0.1% vs. 0.6%, P=0.027; 2 years: 0.2% vs. 0.9%, P=0.015), and other postoperative mechanical complications (1 year: 4.9% vs. 7.1%, P=0.010; 2 years: 6.2% vs. 8.4%, P=0.023). Otherwise, the data for outpatient THA patients was not statistically different from inpatient THA patients across all studied complications.
CONCLUSION: Outpatient revision THA may be a safe alternative to inpatient revision THA for carefully selected patients. Establishing patient- and case-specific parameters to optimize outcomes, satisfaction, safety, and value is critical.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adults undergoing revision THA between 2010 and 2020 with 2-year follow-up data were identified on a large insurance claims database. Following stratification by inpatient versus outpatient revision THA, patients from both groups were matched 1:1 by demographics and revision characteristics. Ninety-day postoperative medical and 1- and 2-year postoperative surgical complications after matching were compared.
RESULTS: Among 67,570 patients, mean age was 65.3 years, 57.0% were female, and mean Charlson comorbidity index score was 1.72. Subsequent to 1:1 matching, 1,555 inpatient and outpatient revision THA patients were identified. Outpatient THA patients had significantly lower rates of blood transfusions (3.6% vs 5.1%, P=0.049), broken prosthesis (1 year: 0.1% vs. 0.6%, P=0.027; 2 years: 0.2% vs. 0.9%, P=0.015), and other postoperative mechanical complications (1 year: 4.9% vs. 7.1%, P=0.010; 2 years: 6.2% vs. 8.4%, P=0.023). Otherwise, the data for outpatient THA patients was not statistically different from inpatient THA patients across all studied complications.
CONCLUSION: Outpatient revision THA may be a safe alternative to inpatient revision THA for carefully selected patients. Establishing patient- and case-specific parameters to optimize outcomes, satisfaction, safety, and value is critical.