Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:39:08.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The projected burden of complex surgical site infections following hip and knee arthroplasties in adults in the United States, 2020 through 2030

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2018

Hannah M. Wolford
Affiliation:
Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
Kelly M. Hatfield
Affiliation:
Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
Prabasaj Paul
Affiliation:
Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
Sarah H. Yi
Affiliation:
Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
Rachel B. Slayton
Affiliation:
Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia

Abstract

Background

As the US population ages, the number of hip and knee arthroplasties is expected to increase. Because surgical site infections (SSIs) following these procedures contribute substantial morbidity, mortality, and costs, we projected SSIs expected to occur from 2020 through 2030.

Methods

We used a stochastic Poisson process to project the number of primary and revision arthroplasties and SSIs. Primary arthroplasty rates were calculated using annual estimates of hip and knee arthroplasty stratified by age and gender from the 2012–2014 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and standardized by census population data. Revision rates, dependent on time from primary procedure, were obtained from published literature and were uniformly applied for all ages and genders. Stratified complex SSI rates for arthroplasties were obtained from 2012–2015 National Healthcare Safety Network data. To evaluate the possible impact of prevention measures, we recalculated the projections with an SSI rate reduced by 30%, the national target established by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Results

Without a reduction in SSI rates, we projected an increase in complex SSIs following hip and knee arthroplasty of 14% between 2020 and 2030. We projected a total burden of 77,653 SSIs; however, meeting the 30% rate reduction could prevent 23,297 of these SSIs.

Conclusions

Given current SSI rates, we project that complex SSI burden for primary and revision arthroplasty may increase due to an aging population. Reducing the SSI rate to the national HHS target could prevent 23,000 SSIs and reduce subsequent morbidity, mortality, and Medicare costs.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© 2018 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lovald, ST, Ong, KL, Lau, EC, Schmier, JK, Bozic, KJ, Kurtz, SM. Mortality, cost, and downstream disease of total hip arthroplasty patients in the medicare population. J Arthroplasty 2014;29:242246.Google Scholar
2. Lovald, ST, Ong, KL, Lau, EC, Schmier, JK, Bozic, KJ, Kurtz, SM. Mortality, cost, and health outcomes of total knee arthroplasty in Medicare patients. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:449454.Google Scholar
3. Kurtz, SM, Ong, KL, Lau, E, Bozic, KJ. Impact of the economic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014;96:624630.Google Scholar
4. Kurtz, SM, Ong, KL, Schmier, J, et al. Future clinical and economic impact of revision total hip and knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89 Suppl 3:144151.Google Scholar
5. Pollock, M, Somerville, L, Firth, A, Lanting, B. Outpatient total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. JBJS Rev 2016;4.Google Scholar
6. Bozic, KJ, Lau, E, Kurtz, S, et al. Patient-related risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection and postoperative mortality following total hip arthroplasty in Medicare patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012;94:794800.Google Scholar
7. Bozic, KJ, Ward, DT, Lau, EC, et al. Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection following primary total hip arthroplasty: a case control study. J Arthroplasty 2014;29:154156.Google Scholar
8. Lee, QJ, Mak, WP, Wong, YC. Risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection in total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2015;23:282286.Google Scholar
9. Peter, WF, Dekker, J, Tilbury, C, et al. The association between comorbidities and pain, physical function and quality of life following hip and knee arthroplasty. Rheumatol Int 2015;35:12331241.Google Scholar
10. Singh, JA, Vessely, MB, Harmsen, WS, et al. A population-based study of trends in the use of total hip and total knee arthroplasty, 1969–2008. Mayo Clin Proc 2010;85:898904.Google Scholar
11. Berrios-Torres, SI, Yi, SH, Bratzler, DW, et al. Activity of commonly used antimicrobial prophylaxis regimens against pathogens causing coronary artery bypass graft and arthroplasty surgical site infections in the United States, 2006–2009. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:231239.Google Scholar
12. Poultsides, LA, Ma, Y, Della Valle, AG, Chiu, YL, Sculco, TP, Memtsoudis, SG. In-hospital surgical site infections after primary hip and knee arthroplasty—incidence and risk factors. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:385389.Google Scholar
13. National targets and metrics. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion website. https://health.gov/hcq/prevent-hai-measures.asp. Published 2017. Accessed October 12, 2017.Google Scholar
14. Yi, SH, Baggs, J, Culler, SD, Berrios-Torres, SI, Jernigan, JA. Medicare reimbursement attributable to periprosthetic joint infection following primary hip and knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015;30:931938.Google Scholar
15. Soe, MM, Gould, CV, Pollock, D, Edwards, J. Targeted assessment for prevention of healthcare-associated infections: a new prioritization metric. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:13791384.Google Scholar
16. Policies for Eliminating Healthcare-Associated Infections: Lessons Learned From State Stakeholder Engagement. The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials and the Centers for Disease Control; 2012.Google Scholar
17. Baker, AW, Dicks, KV, Durkin, MJ, et al. Epidemiology of surgical site infection in a community hospital network. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:519526.Google Scholar
18. 2014 National Population Projections. US Census; 2014.Google Scholar
19. Sher, A, Keswani, A, Yao, DH, Anderson, M, Koenig, K, Moucha, CS. Predictors of same-day discharge in primary total joint arthroplasty patients and risk factors for post-discharge complications. J Arthroplasty 2017;32 Suppl 9:S150S156.Google Scholar
20. Aynardi, M, Post, Z, Ong, A, Orozco, F, Sukin, DC. Outpatient surgery as a means of cost reduction in total hip arthroplasty: a case-control study. HSS J 2014;10:252255.Google Scholar
21. Procedure-associated module SSI. National Healthcare Safety Network. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/pdfs/pscmanual/9pscssicurrent.pdf. Published 2017. Accessed July 30, 2018.Google Scholar
22. Katz, JN, Wright, EA, Wright, J, et al. Twelve-year risk of revision after primary total hip replacement in the US Medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012;94: 18251832.Google Scholar
23. Duffy, GP, Crowder, AR, Trousdale, RR, Berry, DJ. Cemented total knee arthroplasty using a modern prosthesis in young patients with osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty 2007;22:6770.Google Scholar
24. Guo, L, Yang, L, Briard, JL, Duan, XJ, Wang, FY. Long-term survival analysis of posterior cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012;20:17601765.Google Scholar
25. Kearns, SR, Jamal, B, Rorabeck, CH, Bourne, RB. Factors affecting survival of uncemented total hip arthroplasty in patients 50 years or younger. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;453:103109.Google Scholar
26. Ong, KL, Lau, E, Suggs, J, Kurtz, SM, Manley, MT. Risk of subsequent revision after primary and revision total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010;468:30703076.Google Scholar
27. Finkelstein, EA, Khavjou, OA, Thompson, H, et al. Obesity and severe obesity forecasts through 2030. Am J Prev Med 2012;42:563570.Google Scholar
28. Kurtz, SM, Lau, E, Watson, H, Schmier, JK, Parvizi, J. Economic burden of periprosthetic joint infection in the United States. J Arthroplasty 2012;27:6165.Google Scholar
29. Berrios-Torres, SI, Umscheid, CA, Bratzler, DW, et al. Centers for disease control and prevention guideline for the prevention of surgical site infection, 2017. JAMA Surg 2017;152: 784791.Google Scholar
30. Magill, SS, Edwards, JR, Bamberg, W, et al. Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections. N Engl J Med 2014; 370:11981208.Google Scholar
31. Scott RD. The direct medical costs of healthcare-associated infections in US hospitals and the benefits of prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://www.cdc.gov/hai/pdfs/hai/scott_costpaper.pdf. Published 2009. Accessed July 30, 2018.Google Scholar
32. National inpatient sample. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website. https://chronicdata.cdc.gov/Heart-Disease-Stroke-Prevention/Healthcare-Cost-and-Utilization-Project-HCUP-Natio/ntny-77fx. Updated 2018. Accessed July 30, 2018.Google Scholar
33. Bovonratwet, P, Webb, ML, Ondeck, NT, et al. Definitional differences of ‘outpatient’ versus ‘inpatient’ THA and TKA can affect study outcomes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017;475:29172925.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Wolford et al. supplementary material

Appendix

Download Wolford et al. supplementary material(File)
File 25.6 KB