Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 12/2015

01-12-2015 | Clinical Research

Risk Calculators Predict Failures of Knee and Hip Arthroplasties: Findings from a Large Health Maintenance Organization

Authors: Elizabeth W. Paxton, MA, Maria C. S. Inacio, PhD, Monti Khatod, MD, Eric Yue, MD, Tadashi Funahashi, MD, Thomas Barber, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 12/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Considering the cost and risk associated with revision Total knee arthroplasty (TKAs) and Total hip arthroplasty (THAs), steps to prevent these operations will help patients and reduce healthcare costs. Revision risk calculators for patients may reduce revision surgery by supporting clinical decision-making at the point of care.

Questions/purposes

We sought to develop a TKA and THA revision risk calculator using data from a large health-maintenance organization’s arthroplasty registry and determine the best set of predictors for the revision risk calculator.

Methods

Revision risk calculators for THAs and TKAs were developed using a patient cohort from a total joint replacement registry and data from a large US integrated healthcare system. The cohort included all patients who had primary procedures performed in our healthcare system between April 2001 and July 2008 and were followed until January 2014 (TKAs, n = 41,750; THAs, n = 22,721), During the study period, 9% of patients (TKA = 3066/34,686; THA=1898/20,285) were lost to followup and 7% died (TKA= 2350/41,750; THA=1419/20,285). The outcome of interest was revision surgery and was defined as replacement of any component for any reason within 5 years postoperatively. Candidate predictors for the revision risk calculator were limited to preoperative patient demographics, comorbidities, and procedure diagnoses. Logistic regression models were used to identify predictors and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and c-statistic were used to choose final models for the revision risk calculator.

Results

The best predictors for the TKA revision risk calculator were age (odds ratio [OR], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95–0.97; p < 0.001), sex (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75–0.95; p = 0.004), square-root BMI (OR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.99–1.11; p = 0.140), diabetes (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17–1.48; p < 0.001), osteoarthritis (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.84–1.62; p = 0.368), posttraumatic arthritis (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.07–2.56; p = 0.022), and osteonecrosis (OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.31–4.92; p = 0.006). The best predictors for the THA revision risk calculator were sex (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05–1.46; p = 0.010), age (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.98–0.99; p < 0.001), square-root BMI (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00–1.15; p = 0.066), and osteoarthritis (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.66–1.09; p = 0.190).

Conclusions

Study model parameters can be used to create web-based calculators. Surgeons can enter personalized patient data in the risk calculators for identification of risk of revision which can be used for clinical decision making at the point of care. Future prospective studies will be needed to validate these calculators and to refine them with time.

Level of Evidence

Level III, prognostic study.
Literature
1.
2.
Bilimoria KY, Liu Y, Paruch JL, Zhou L, Kmiecik TE, Ko CY, Cohen ME. Development and evaluation of the universal ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator: a decision aid and informed consent tool for patients and surgeons. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:833–842.e1-3.
3.
Bolland MJ, Siu AT, Mason BH, Horne AM, Ames RW, Grey AB, Gamble GD, Reid IR. Evaluation of the FRAX and Garvan fracture risk calculators in older women. J Bone Miner Res. 2011;26:420–427.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Bozic KJ, Katz P, Cisternas M, Ono L, Ries MD, Showstack J. Hospital resource utilization for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:570–576.PubMed
5.
Bozic KJ, Ong K, Lau E, Berry DJ, Vail TP, Kurtz SM, Rubash HE. Estimating risk in Medicare patients with THA: an electronic risk calculator for periprosthetic joint infection and mortality. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:574–583.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
6.
D’Agostino RB Sr, Vasan RS, Pencina MJ, Wolf PA, Cobain M, Massaro JM, Kannel WB. General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2008;117:743–753.CrossRefPubMed
7.
DeFrances CJ, Cullen KA, Kozak LJ. National Hospital Discharge Survey: 2005 annual summary with detailed diagnosis and procedure data. Vital Health Stat 13. 2007;165:1–209.
8.
Ethgen O, Bruyere O, Richy F, Dardennes C, Reginster JY. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty: a qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:963–974.PubMed
9.
Furnes O, Espehaug B, Lie SA, Vollset SE, Engesaeter LB, Havelin LI. Early failures among 7,174 primary total knee replacements: a follow-up study from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994–2000. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002;73:117–129.CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Gioe TJ, Killeen KK, Grimm K, Mehle S, Scheltema K. Why are total knee replacements revised?: analysis of early revision in a community knee implant registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;428:100–106.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Graves SE, Davidson D, Ingerson L, Ryan P, Griffith EC, McDermott BF, McElroy HJ, Pratt NL. The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Med J Aust. 2004;180(5 suppl):S31–34.PubMed
13.
Hagen TP, Vaughan-Sarrazin MS, Cram P. Relation between hospital orthopaedic specialisation and outcomes in patients aged 65 and older: retrospective analysis of US Medicare data. BMJ. 2010;340:c165.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
14.
Harrell FE Jr. Regression Modeling Strategies: With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis. New York, NY: Springer; 2001.CrossRef
15.
Herberts P, Malchau H. Long-term registration has improved the quality of hip replacement: a review of the Swedish THR Register comparing 160,000 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000;71:111–121.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Jelovsek JE, Chagin K, Brubaker L, Rogers RG, Richter HE, Arya L, Barber MD, Shepherd JP, Nolen TL, Norton P, Sung V, Menefee S, Siddiqui N, Meikle SF, Kattan MW; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. A model for predicting the risk of de novo stress urinary incontinence in women undergoing pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:279–287.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
17.
Julin J, Jamsen E, Puolakka T, Konttinen YT, Moilanen T. Younger age increases the risk of early prosthesis failure following primary total knee replacement for osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 32,019 total knee replacements in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop. 2010;81:413–419.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
18.
Kang M, Jeong CW, Choi WS, Park YH, Cho SY, Lee S, Lee SB, Ku JH, Hong SK, Byun SS, Jeong H, Kwak C, Kim HH, Lee E, Lee SE; Seoul National University-Uro-Oncology Group. Pre- and post-operative nomograms to predict recurrence-free probability in Korean men with clinically localized prostate cancer. PLoS One. 2014;9:e100053.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
19.
Katz JN, Mahomed NN, Baron JA, Barrett JA, Fossel AH, Creel AH, Wright J, Wright EA, Losina E. Association of hospital and surgeon procedure volume with patient-centered outcomes of total knee replacement in a population-based cohort of patients age 65 years and older. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56:568–574.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Katz JN, Wright EA, Wright J, Malchau H, Mahomed NN, Stedman M, Baron JA, Losina E. Twelve-year risk of revision after primary total hip replacement in the U.S. Medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:1825–1832.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
21.
Khatod M, Cafri G, Namba RS, Inacio MCS, Paxton EW. Risk factors for total hip arthroplasty aseptic revision. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:1412–1417.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kim JY, Mlodinow AS, Khavanin N, Hume KM, Simmons CJ, Weiss MJ, Murphy RX Jr, Gutowski KA. Individualized risk of surgical complications: an application of the Breast Reconstruction Risk Assessment Score. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3:e405.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
23.
Koebnick C, Langer-Gould AM, Gould MK, Chao CR, Iyer RL, Smith N, Chen W, Jacobsen SJ. Sociodemographic characteristics of members of a large, integrated health care system: comparison with US Census Bureau data. Perm J. 2012;16:37–41.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
24.
Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Schmier J, Mowat F, Saleh K, Dybvik E, Karrholm J, Garellick G, Havelin LI, Furnes O, Malchau H, Lau E. Future clinical and economic impact of revision total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(suppl 3):144–151.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Labek G, Thaler M, Janda W, Agreiter M, Stockl B. Revision rates after total joint replacement: cumulative results from worldwide joint register datasets. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:293–297.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Lo JC, Pressman AR, Chandra M, Ettinger B. Fracture risk tool validation in an integrated healthcare delivery system. Am J Manag Care. 2011;17:188–194.PubMed
27.
Mahomed NN, Barrett JA, Katz JN, Phillips CB, Losina E, Lew RA, Guadagnoli E, Harris WH, Poss R, Baron JA. Rates and outcomes of primary and revision total hip replacement in the United States medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:27–32.PubMed
28.
Malinzak RA, Ritter MA, Berend ME, Meding JB, Olberding EM, Davis KE. Morbidly obese, diabetic, younger, and unilateral joint arthroplasty patients have elevated total joint arthroplasty infection rates. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24(6 suppl):84–88.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Meding JB, Meding LK, Ritter MA, Keating EM. Pain relief and functional improvement remain 20 years after knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:144–149.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
30.
31.
Namba RS, Cafri G, Khatod M, Inacio MC, Brox TW, Paxton EW. Risk factors for total knee arthroplasty aseptic revision. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(8 suppl):122–127.CrossRefPubMed
32.
33.
Paxton EW, Kiley ML, Love R, Barber TC, Funahashi TT, Inacio MC. Kaiser Permanente implant registries benefit patient safety, quality improvement, cost-effectiveness. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2013;39:246–252.PubMed
34.
Paxton EW, Namba RS, Maletis GB, Khatod M, Yue EJ, Davies M, Low RB Jr, Wyatt RW, Inacio MC, Funahashi TT. A prospective study of 80,000 total joint and 5000 anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedures in a community-based registry in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(suppl 2):117–132.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Puopolo KM, Draper D, Wi S, Newman TB, Zupancic J, Lieberman E, Smith M, Escobar GJ. Estimating the probability of neonatal early-onset infection on the basis of maternal risk factors. Pediatrics. 2011;128:e1155–1163.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
36.
Rolfson O, Karrholm J, Dahlberg LE, Garellick G. Patient-reported outcomes in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register: results of a nationwide prospective observational study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:867–875.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Romine LB, May RG, Taylor HD, Chimento GF. Accuracy and clinical utility of a peri-operative risk calculator for total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:445–448.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Royston P, Moons KG, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y. Prognosis and prognostic research: developing a prognostic model. BMJ. 2009;338:b604.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Royston P, Sauerbrei W. Multivariable Model-Building: A Pragmatic Approach to Regression Analysis Based on Fractional Polynomials forModelling Continuous Variables. West Sussex, England: Wiley; 2008.CrossRef
40.
Santaguida PL, Hawker GA, Hudak PL, Glazier R, Mahomed NN, Kreder HJ, Coyte PC, Wright JG. Patient characteristics affecting the prognosis of total hip and knee joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Can J Surg. 2008;51:428–436.PubMedCentralPubMed
41.
Schrama JC, Espehaug B, Hallan G, Engesaeter LB, Furnes O, Havelin LI, Fevang BT. Risk of revision for infection in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared with osteoarthritis: a prospective, population-based study on 108,786 hip and knee joint arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62:473–479.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Shabir S, Halimi JM, Cherukuri A, Ball S, Ferro C, Lipkin G, Benavente D, Gatault P, Baker R, Kiberd B, Borrows R. Predicting 5-year risk of kidney transplant failure: a prediction instrument using data available at 1 year posttransplantation. Am J Kidney Dis. 2014;63:643–651.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Sheridan S, Pignone M, Mulrow C. Framingham-based tools to calculate the global risk of coronary heart disease: a systematic review of tools for clinicians. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:1039–1052.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
44.
Sherman SK, Hrabe JE, Charlton ME, Cromwell JW, Byrn JC. Development of an improved risk calculator for complications in proctectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:986–994.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
45.
Watts NB, Lewiecki EM, Miller PD, Baim S. National Osteoporosis Foundation 2008 Clinician’s Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis and the World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX): what they mean to the bone densitometrist and bone technologist. J Clin Densitom. 2008;11:473–477.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Risk Calculators Predict Failures of Knee and Hip Arthroplasties: Findings from a Large Health Maintenance Organization
Authors
Elizabeth W. Paxton, MA
Maria C. S. Inacio, PhD
Monti Khatod, MD
Eric Yue, MD
Tadashi Funahashi, MD
Thomas Barber, MD
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 12/2015
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-015-4506-4

Other articles of this Issue 12/2015

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 12/2015 Go to the issue

Not the Last Word

Not the Last Word: Arthrostasis

Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor: Do Complication Rates Differ by Gender After Metal-on-metal Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review

Symposium: 2014 International Hip Society Proceedings

Does a Titanium-coated Polyethylene Press-fit Cup Give Reliable Midterm Results?

CORR Insights

CORR Insights®: No Differences in Early Results of a Hybrid Glenoid Compared With a Pegged Implant

CORR Insights

CORR Insights®: Primary Ceramic-on-ceramic Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a 32-mm Ceramic Head with a Titanium-alloy Sleeve

News

Thank You to Our Peer Reviewers