Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Jul;33(7S):S49-S55. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.048. Epub 2018 Feb 21.

Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.

Author information

1
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received home health services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients.

METHODS:

We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone.

RESULTS:

In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P < .0001), but otherwise similar to patients in the EPRA-HHS cohort. EPRA-only patients demonstrated no differences in VR-12 (P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior (P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS.

CONCLUSION:

The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS.

KEYWORDS:

electronic patient rehabilitation; home health services; orthopedics; patient activation; total hip arthroplasty; value-based care

PMID:
29588123
DOI:
10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.048

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center