Skip to main content

Population Requirements for Primary Hip-Replacement Surgery in England

A Comparison with Knee-Replacement

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
EUROHIP
  • 378 Accesses

Abstract

The debate about health care rationing, in terms of both its justification and mechanism, is conducted largely in the absence of data. The relevant literature mainly consists of assertion, exploration of ethical principles and political analysis. In particular, an epidemiological basis for the assumption that demand for effective treatments will invariably exceed supply is lacking. Waiting list figures suggest that health services are not satisfying demand in particular areas, but this does not mean that demand is generally insatiable. Total hip and knee replacements are effective interventions for patients with severe joint disease, resulting in large improvements in patient-related outcome measures for the majority of those undergoing these procedures. Although the number of operations performed in England has been rising each year over the last two decades [1], it has been suggested that there is still a large unmet need. However, the current evidence base is limited. Some prevalence data on severe joint disease in the community are available [2], but incidence data to estimate the annual population requirement for hip and knee replacement are lacking. Consensus criteria for case selection for total joint replacement (TJR) have been published [3, 4], but data on the impact of these criteria on annual rates are unavailable, and the implications of different thresholds for surgery, patient preference and other modifiers of the decision to recommend surgery are unclear.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hospital episode statistics 1997. London: Department of Health, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tennant A, Fear J, Pickering A, Hillman M, Cutts A, Chamberlain MA. Prevalence of knee problems in the population aged 55 years and over: identifying the need for knee arthroplasty. BMJ 1995; 310:1291–1293

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Taylor CD, Williams JI. Primary hip and knee replacement surgery: Ontario criteria for case selection and surgical priority. Qual Health Care 1996; 5:20–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hadorn DC, Holmes AC. The New Zealand priority criteria project. Part 1: overview. BMJ 1997; 314:131–134

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Eachus J, Williams M, Chan P, Smith GD, Grainge M, Donovan J, Frankel S. Deprivation and cause specific morbidity: evidence from the Somerset and Avon survey of health. BMJ 1996; 312:287–292

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jüni P, Dieppe P, Donovan J, Peters T, Eachus J, Pearson N, Greenwood R, Frankel S. Population requirement for primary knee replacement surgery: a cross-sectional study. Rheumatology 2003; 42:516–521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Frankel S, Eachus J, Pearson N, Greenwood R, Chan P, Peters TJ, Donovan J, Smith GD, Dieppe P. Population requirement for primary hip-replacement surgery: a cross-sectional study. Lancet 1999; 353:1304–1309

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Peters TJ, Eachus JI. Achieving equal probability of selection under various random sampling strategies. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1995; 9:219–224

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Anderson JJ, Felson DT. Factors associated with osteoarthritis of the knee in the first national Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HANES I). Evidence for an association with overweight, race, and physical demands of work. Am J Epidemiol 1988; 128:179–189

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hadorn DC, Holmes A. The New Zealand Priority Criteria Project. Criteria Pilot Tests. Available at:http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/314/7074/131/DC1. Accessed December 12, 2001

    Google Scholar 

  11. Leske MC, Ederer F, Podgor M. Estimating incidence from age-specific prevalence in glaucoma. Am J Epidemiol 1981; 113:606–613

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Williams B, Whatmough P, McGill J, Rushton L. Private funding of elective hospital treatment in England and Wales, 1997–1998: national survey. BMJ 2000; 320:904–905

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lequesne MG, Mery C, Samson M, Gerard P. Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl 1987; 65:85–89

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes following total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis. J Orthop Rheumatol 1988; 1:95–108

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dieppe P, Basler HD, Chard J, Croft P, Dixon J, Hurley M, Lohmander S, Raspe H. Knee replacement surgery for osteoarthritis: effectiveness, practice variations, indications and possible determinants of utilization. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38:73–83

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. National hospital discharge survey 1997. Hyattsville, Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dougados M, Gueguen A, Nguyen M, Berdah L, Lequesne M, Mazieres B, Vignon E. Radiological progression of hip osteoarthritis: definition, risk factors and correlations with clinical status. Ann Rheum Dis 1996; 55:356–362

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all study participants and the partners and staff of participating general practices for their support and interest in the study. We are indebted to the whole of the SASH research team: Kirsty Alchin, Ros Berkeley-Hill, Jane Brooks, Hilary Brownett, Phil Chan, Clare Cross, Catherine Dawe, Cathy Doel, Jenny Eachus, Helen Forward, Matthew Grainge, Rosemary Greenwood, Fiona Hollyman, Sue Jones, Helen Moore, Kate Morris, Nicky Pearson, Brian Quilty, Chris Smith, Lynne Smith, Gwyn Williams, Mark Williams, Sue Williams, and Andrea Wilson; and Allan Douglas and Doreen Cook at Dillon Computing. Finally, we are grateful to our co-investigators, Jenny Donovan, Tim Peters and Stephen Frankel, and to Brian Williams for providing unpublished data. The SASH was originally funded by the Department of Health and the South and West NHS Research and Development Directorate. This work was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (grants no. 3233-066377 and 3200-066378). The Department of Social Medicine is the lead centre for the MRC Health Services Research Collaboration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Jüni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 EFORT

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jüni, P., Dieppe, P. (2009). Population Requirements for Primary Hip-Replacement Surgery in England. In: Puhl, W., Günther, KP., Dieppe, P., Dreinhöfer, K.E. (eds) EUROHIP. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74137-4_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74137-4_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-74133-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-74137-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics