Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
64 result(s) for "Rangan, Amar"
Sort by:
Is there a difference in thresholds for revision between shoulder arthroplasty types? A National Joint Registry Study
Shoulder arthroplasty procedures have increased significantly, with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) becoming more common. While RSA revision rates are reported as low, these figures may not accurately reflect implant success. Factors such as older patient demographics and surgeon reluctance to perform complex revisions may contribute to lower revision rates. This perception may encourage broader RSA use in younger patients, potentially increasing long-term revision burdens. This study examines whether revision thresholds differ between shoulder arthroplasty types to determine if low revision rates reported signify true implant success. All shoulder arthroplasties from the 1st April 2012 to the 31st March 2022 were requested from the National Joint Registry (NJR). Mean postoperative Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) was calculated for RSA, total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), and hemiarthroplasty (HA). Revision rates were analysed between implants for patients with a mean postoperative OSS of <29 (a pre-defined unsatisfactory score) and those with the lowest 25%, and lowest 10% of OSS scores. Chi-squared tests with Bonferroni correction assessed differences among implant groups. Among 21,918 NJR patients with postoperative OSS data, HA had the highest proportion of patients with 'unsatisfactory' function (38.12%), followed by RSA (26.99%) and TSA (15.35%). 4.87% of RSA patients with unsatisfactory function were revised, significantly less than TSA (10.58%) and HA (13.86%) (p < 0.001). In those with the lowest 25% of OSS scores, revision rates were 4.78% for RSA, 8.76% for TSA, and 15.02% for HA (p < 0.001). In the lowest 10%, revisions occurred in 6.53% of RSAs, 12.44% of TSAs, and 17.03% of HAs (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between TSA and HA (p = 0.06). RSA has lower revision rates than HA and TSA; however, this may not reflect superior implant performance. Patients with poor RSA function are less likely to undergo revision, suggesting higher revision thresholds. As RSA use expands, its assumed low revision rate must be reassessed to prevent long-term burdens of poorly functioning implants. Further research is needed to determine whether surgical selection bias influences revision rates and to establish additional benchmarks or surrogates in joint registries for a more comprehensive assessment of implant performance.
Can we develop consensus on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty? A study protocol using a real-time Delphi technique among expert clinicians in the UK
BackgroundShoulder arthroplasty incidence is projected to continue its exponential growth and the resultant burden of monitoring patients with shoulder arthroplasty implants creates significant pressure on orthopaedic services. Surveillance offers the opportunity to study implant longevity, detect failing implants and potentially perform revision at lower morbidity and cost. There is a paucity of evidence to support recommendations on long-term follow-up in shoulder arthroplasty. Prospective studies comparing long-term follow-up and structure are impractical from time, resource and cost perspectives. A real-time Delphi technique represents a mechanism by which experts involved in long-term follow-up of primary shoulder arthroplasty can formulate recommendations via a transparent, reproducible and efficient process. We outline the protocol for a real-time Delphi study seeking consensus on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty .MethodsA real-time Delphi technique will be used. A planning committee will design the Delphi statements. A steering committee will supervise and monitor the real-time Delphi process. Participants will be asked to rate their agreement with statements using a 5-point Likert scale. The Delphi statements will be derived from review of published literature, and the strength of evidence available for each statement will be provided. We will offer participation to all surgeons and extended-scope practitioners who are current members of the British Elbow & Shoulder Society (BESS) and have clinical practice involving shoulder arthroplasty follow-up. The questionnaire will be active for 4 weeks and requires a minimum of 20 participants. Consensus agreement is defined as 70% of participants selecting at least a 4-point on a 5-point Likert scale.DiscussionWe anticipate the outlined study will achieve consensus on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty. We intend to use the expert consensus recommendations achieved, in addition to the limited applicable published evidence available, to produce BESS-affiliated guidelines on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty.EthicsEthical approval is not required for the real-time Delphi study.We expect the results of this initiative will be published in a peer-reviewed, high-impact journal.
Social inequalities in patient outcomes after total hip replacement surgery for osteoarthritis in England: A population-based cohort study of the National Joint Registry
Reducing health inequalities is of national importance. Total hip replacement (THR) is a commonly used elective surgical procedure. Few studies have examined area-level inequalities for a wide range of outcomes following THR. The aim of this study is to compare area-level socioeconomic differences in outcomes following primary THR surgery for osteoarthritis in England. This is a population-based prospective cohort study of the National Joint Registry (NJR). Data from the NJR were linked to national mortality, Hospital Episode Statistics and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) databases for England from 2007 to 2017 with follow-up to 2023 for outcomes, for patients aged 50 years and over with osteoarthritis. Outcomes of 90-day mortality; 5-year revision rate; 6-month health complications; 1-year rehospitalisation and reoperation for orthopaedic indications; and patient-reported Oxford Hip Score (OHS), post-THR surgery were examined by area-level Index of Multiple Deprivation quintiles. Modified Poisson regression was adjusted for patient age, sex, body mass index, pre-operative physical state and comorbidity. Among 448,184 patients with primary THR, mean age was 70 years (standard deviation: 9 years) and 61% were women. Patients from the most deprived group were more likely to die within 90 days of the operation compared to the least deprived group (adjusted rate ratio, RR: 1.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) [1.07, 1.46]); adjusted risk difference, RD: 9 (95% CI [2, 16]) per 10,000. Similarly, those from the most deprived group were more likely to experience complications (RR: 1.26 (95% CI [1.21, 1.32]); RD: 1.14% (95% CI [0.92, 1.36])); be rehospitalised (RR: 1.16 (95% CI [1.14, 1.19]; RD: 2.78% (95% CI [2.39, 3.17])) or reoperated (RR: 1.23 (95% CI [1.13, 1.33]); RD: 0.31% (95% CI [0.19, 0.44])) and report poorer OHS (adjusted score: -2.97 (95% CI [-3.10, -2.84]) N = 200,522). There was no variation by deprivation level for THR revision rates at 5 years (RR: 1.02 (95% CI [0.94, 1.10]); RD: 0.02% (95% CI [-0.10, 0.15])). The main study limitations are the lack of complete PROMs data, and the exclusion of self-funded patients or those with private insurance for THR procedures in independent hospitals. Inequalities in several outcomes after THR are present in England by area-level deprivation. These findings are useful to inform shared decision-making for patients deciding whether to undergo hip replacement and to benchmark the effectiveness of policies which aim to reduce health inequalities following THR.
Are we getting better over time? Clinical and patient-reported outcomes for reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a National Joint Registry cohort study
ObjectivesThis study aims to review whether both clinical and Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty have improved over time using the National Joint Registry (NJR).DesignThis study is a population-based cohort study using the NJR and Hospital Episode Statistics for England.SettingPublicly funded hospitals and procedures in England from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2021.ParticipantsAll patients that received a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in the specified time period. Patients were excluded if they had less than 1 year of follow-up.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was revision at one year. Secondary outcomes were non-revision re-operation and mortality at one year, length of stay (LOS) and mean change in Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) from pre-operatively to 6 months post-operatively.ResultsThere were 24 411 RSA cases available for analysis. There was no significant improvement in revision rates over time; however, there was a significant reduction in non-revision re-operations (OR 0.93 (0.86–0.99) p=0.03) and mortality (0.96 (0.92–1.00) p=0.04). LOS over time improved with an average reduction of 0.24 days per year, ranging from a mean of 3.94 days in 2013 to 2.44 days in 2021 (p<0.001). There was also a significant improvement in OSS preoperatively to 6 months as time progressed (p<0.001) with an average improvement of 0.51 points per year with a mean improvement in 2013 of 15.84 improving to 20.29 in 2021.ConclusionOver the 9-year period recorded in the NJR, revision rates were low and remained similar. There has, however, been an improvement in other clinical outcomes such as non-revision reoperation and mortality as well as functional outcomes and reduced LOS, which demonstrates progress in the quality of care provided to shoulder replacement patients and is suggestive of advancements in surgical techniques, perioperative management and rehabilitation strategies.
Inequalities in provision of hip and knee replacement surgery for osteoarthritis by age, sex, and social deprivation in England between 2007–2017: A population-based cohort study of the National Joint Registry
While the United Kingdom National Health Service aimed to reduce social inequalities in the provision of joint replacement, it is unclear whether these gaps have reduced. We describe secular trends in the provision of primary hip and knee replacement surgery between social deprivation groups. We used the National Joint Registry to identify all hip and knee replacements performed for osteoarthritis from 2007 to 2017 in England. The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 was used to identify the relative level of deprivation of the patient living area. Multilevel negative binomial regression models were used to model the differences in rates of joint replacement. Choropleth maps of hip and knee replacement provision were produced to identify the geographical variation in provision by Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). A total of 675,342 primary hip and 834,146 primary knee replacements were studied. The mean age was 70 years old (standard deviation: 9) with 60% and 56% of women undergoing hip and knee replacements, respectively. The overall rate of hip replacement increased from 27 to 36 per 10,000 person-years and knee replacement from 33 to 46. Inequalities of provision between the most (reference) and least affluent areas have remained constant for both joints (hip: rate ratio (RR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval [0.56, 0.60] in 2007, RR = 0.59 [0.58, 0.61] in 2017; knee: RR = 0.82 [0.80, 0.85] in 2007, RR = 0.81 [0.80, 0.83] in 2017). For hip replacement, CCGs with the highest concentration of deprived areas had lower overall provision rates, and CCGs with very few deprived areas had higher provision rates. There was no clear pattern of provision inequalities between CCGs and deprivation concentration for knee replacement. Study limitations include the lack of publicly available information to explore these inequalities beyond age, sex, and geographical area. Information on clinical need for surgery or patient willingness to access care were unavailable. In this study, we found that there were inequalities, which remained constant over time, especially in the provision of hip replacement, by degree of social deprivation. Providers of healthcare need to take action to reduce this unwarranted variation in provision of surgery.
Cost-effectiveness of total shoulder arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty: a study using data from the National Joint Registry
ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) and explore variation by age and gender.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis using a lifetime cohort Markov model.SettingNational population registry data.ParticipantsModel parameters were informed by propensity score-matched comparisons of TSA and HA in patients with osteoarthritis and an intact rotator cuff using data from the National Joint Registry.InterventionsTSA and HA.Primary outcome measuresQuality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and healthcare costs for age and gender subgroups. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed.ResultsIn all subgroups, TSA was more cost-effective, with the probability of being cost-effective about 70% for TSA versus 30% for HA at any willingness-to-pay threshold above £1100 per QALY. TSA was dominant in young patients (≤60 years) with a mean cost saving of £463 in men and £658 in women, and a mean QALY gain of 2 in both men and women. In patients aged 61–75 years, there was a mean cost saving following HA of £395 in men and £181 in women, while QALYs remained superior following TSA with a 1.3 gain in men and 1.4 in women. In the older cohort (> 75 years), the cost difference was highest and the QALY difference was lowest; there was a cost-saving following HA of £905 in men and £966 in women. The mean QALY gain remained larger after TSA: 0.7 in men and 0.9 in women.ConclusionTSA was more cost-effective than HA in patients with osteoarthritis. QALYs were superior following TSA in all patient groups. Cost differences varied by age and TSA was dominant in young patients.
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty versus non-surgical treatment for older adults with acute 3- or 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (PROFHER-2: PROximal Fracture of Humerus Evaluation by Randomisation – Trial Number 2)
Proximal humerus fractures (PHF) are common and painful injuries, with the majority resulting from falls from a standing height. As with other fragility fractures, its age-specific incidence is increasing. Surgical treatment with hemiarthroplasty (HA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have been increasingly used for displaced 3- and 4-part fractures despite a lack of good quality evidence as to whether one type of arthroplasty is superior to the other, and whether surgery is better than non-surgical management. The PROFHER-2 trial has been designed as a pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of RSA vs HA vs Non-Surgical (NS) treatment in patients with 3- and 4-part PHF. Adults over 65 years of age presenting with acute radiographically confirmed 3- or 4-part fractures, with or without associated glenohumeral joint dislocation, who consent for trial participation will be recruited from around 40 National Health Service (NHS) Hospitals in the UK. Patients with polytrauma, open fractures, presence of axillary nerve palsy, pathological (other than osteoporotic) fractures, and those who are unable to adhere to trial procedures will be excluded. We will aim to recruit 380 participants (152 RSA, 152 HA, 76 NS) using 2:2:1 (HA:RSA:NS) randomisation for 3- or 4-part fractures without joint dislocation, and 1:1 (HA:RSA) randomisation for 3- or 4-part fracture dislocations. The primary outcome is the Oxford Shoulder Score at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), pain, range of shoulder motion, fracture healing and implant position on X-rays, further procedures, and complications. Independent Trial Steering Committee and Data Monitoring Committee will oversee the trial conduct, including the reporting of adverse events and harms. The PROFHER-2 trial is designed to provide a robust answer to guide the treatment of patients aged 65 years or over who sustain 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. The pragmatic design and recruitment from around 40 UK NHS hospitals will ensure immediate applicability and generalisability of the trial findings. The full trial results will be made available in a relevant open-access peer-reviewed journal. ISRCTN76296703. Prospectively registered on 5th April 2018.
Exploring the biopsychosocial impact of hypermobility spectrum disorders and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome in an adult population: a protocol for a scoping review
Background Conditions such as hypermobility spectrum disorders (HSD) and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) are most often diagnosed when an individual has joint flexibility beyond the normal physiological limits. Additional characteristics and symptoms include pain and fatigue with individuals also being more likely to report feelings of anxiety and depression. Due to the varied presentation of these conditions, there is a lack of understanding amongst the various healthcare professionals (HCPs) individuals present to, leading to delayed diagnoses and negative experiences for the individuals themselves. This scoping review therefore aims to map the known biopsychosocial impact of adults with HSD and EDS. Methods The scoping review will follow the six-step framework as outlined by Arskey and O’Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. The search will be conducted using the following databases: AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed PEDro. Full-text published articles in the English language (excluding literature and systematic reviews) with adult samples (over the age of 18 years) and a diagnosis of a HSD or EDS, published between 2012 and 2022, will be included in the review. Discussion This review will aim to explore the existing literature for the reported biopsychosocial impact of adults with a HSD or EDS. It will also aim to further acknowledge the gaps in understanding of the condition, how the condition and the impact of the condition is being measured and what HCPs are involved in supporting such individuals. These gaps will be used to inform a future systematic review. It is the overall goal to increase the knowledge of HCPs and the quality of life of adults living with a joint hypermobility condition.
Incidence of shoulder dislocations in the UK, 1995–2015: a population-based cohort study
ObjectiveThis cohort study evaluates the unknown age-specific and gender-specific incidence of primary shoulder dislocations in the UK.SettingUK primary care data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) were used to identify patients aged 16–70 years with a shoulder dislocation during 1995–2015. Coding of primary shoulder dislocations was validated using the CPRD general practitioner questionnaire service.ParticipantsA cohort of 16 763 patients with shoulder dislocation aged 16–70 years during 1995–2015 were identified.Primary outcome measureIncidence rates per 100 000 person-years and 95% CIs were calculated.ResultsCorrect coding of shoulder dislocation within CPRD was 89% (95% CI 83% to 95%), and confirmation that the dislocation was a ‘primary’ was 76% (95% CI 67% to 85%). Seventy-two percent of shoulder dislocations occurred in men. The overall incidence rate in men was 40.4 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 40.4 to 40.4), and in women was 15.5 per 100 000 person-years (95% CI 15.5 to 15.5). The highest incidence was observed in men aged 16–20 years (80.5 per 100 000 person-years; 95% CI 80.5 to 80.6). Incidence in women increased with age to a peak of 28.6 per 100 000 person-years among those aged 61–70 years.ConclusionsThis is the first time the incidence of shoulder dislocations has been studied using primary care data from a national database, and the first time the results for the UK have been produced. While most primary dislocations occurred in young men, an unexpected finding was that the incidence increased in women aged over 50 years, but not in men. The reasons for this are unknown. Further work is commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research to examine treatments and predictors for recurrent shoulder dislocation.Study registrationThe design of this study was approved by the Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (15_260) for the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency.
Anti-TNF (adalimumab) injection for the treatment of pain-predominant early-stage frozen shoulder: the Anti-Freaze-Feasibility randomised controlled trial
ObjectiveThe Anti-Freaze-F (AFF) trial assessed the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to determine whether intra-articular injection of adalimumab can reduce pain and improve function in people with pain-predominant early-stage frozen shoulder.DesignMulticentre, randomised feasibility trial, with embedded qualitative study.SettingFour UK National Health Service (NHS) musculoskeletal and related physiotherapy services.ParticipantsAdults ≥18 years with new episode of shoulder pain attributable to early-stage frozen shoulder.InterventionsParticipants were randomised (centralised computer generated 1:1 allocation) to either ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection of: (1) adalimumab (160 mg) or (2) placebo (saline (0.9% sodium chloride)). Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to treatment allocation. Second injection of allocated treatment (adalimumab 80 mg) or equivalent placebo was administered 2–3 weeks later.Primary feasibility objectives(1) Ability to screen and identify participants; (2) willingness of eligible participants to consent and be randomised; (3) practicalities of delivering the intervention; (4) SD of the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) score and attrition rate at 3 months.ResultsBetween 31 May 2022 and 7 February 2023, 156 patients were screened of whom 39 (25%) were eligible. The main reasons for ineligibility were other shoulder disorder (38.5%; n=45/117) or no longer in pain-predominant frozen shoulder (33.3%; n=39/117). Of the 39 eligible patients, nine (23.1%) consented to be randomised (adalimumab n=4; placebo n=5). The main reason patients declined was because they preferred receiving steroid injection (n=13). All participants received treatment as allocated. The mean time from randomisation to first injection was 12.3 (adalimumab) and 7.2 days (placebo). Completion rates for patient-reported and clinician-assessed outcomes were 100%.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that current NHS musculoskeletal physiotherapy settings yielded only small numbers of participants, too few to make a trial viable. This was because many patients had passed the early stage of frozen shoulder or had already formulated a preference for treatment.Trial registration numberISRCTN 27075727, EudraCT 2021-03509-23, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05299242 (REC 21/NE/0214).