↓ Skip to main content

What Is the Timing of General Health Adverse Events That Occur After Total Joint Arthroplasty?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
Title
What Is the Timing of General Health Adverse Events That Occur After Total Joint Arthroplasty?
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-5224-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel D Bohl, Nathaniel T Ondeck, Bryce A Basques, Brett R Levine, Jonathan N Grauer

Abstract

Despite extensive research regarding risk factors for adverse events after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), there are few publications describing the timing at which such adverse events occur. (1) On which postoperative day do certain adverse events occur? (2) What adverse events occur earlier after TKA than after THA? (3) For each adverse event, what proportion occurred after hospital discharge? We screened the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) to identify all patients undergoing primary THA and primary TKA between 2005 and 2013, resulting in a study population of 124,657 patients evaluated as part of this retrospective database analysis. For each of eight different adverse events, the median postoperative day of diagnosis, interquartile range for day of diagnosis, and middle 80% for day of diagnosis were determined. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to test whether there is a difference of timing for each adverse event as stratified by TKA or THA. The proportion of adverse events occurring after versus before discharge was also calculated. The median day of diagnosis (and interquartile range; middle 80%) for stroke was 2 (1-10; 1-19), myocardial infarction 3 (2-6; 1-15), pulmonary embolism 3 (2-7; 1-19), pneumonia 4 (2-9; 2-17), deep vein thrombosis 6 (3-14; 2-23), urinary tract infection 8 (3-16; 2-24), sepsis 10 (5-19; 2-24), and surgical site infection 17 (11-23; 6-28). For the later occurring adverse events (surgical site infection, sepsis), the rate of occurrence remained high at the end of the 30-day postoperative period. Timing was earlier in patients undergoing TKA for pulmonary embolism (day 3 [interquartile range 2-6] versus 5 [3-17], p < 0.001) and deep vein thrombosis (day 5 [2-11] versus 13 [6-22], p < 0.001). The proportion of events occurring after discharge for myocardial infarction was 97 of 283 (34%), stroke 42 of 118 (36%), pulmonary embolism 223 of 625 (36%), pneumonia 171 of 426 (40%), deep vein thrombosis 576 of 956 (60%), urinary tract infection 958 of 1406 (68%), sepsis 284 of 416 (68%), and surgical site infection 1147 of 1212 (95%). As lengths of hospital stay after TJA continue to decrease, our findings suggest that caution is in order because several acute and immediately life-threatening findings, including myocardial infarction and pulmonary embolism, might occur after discharge. Furthermore, the timing of surgical site infection and sepsis suggests that even the 30-day followup afforded by the ACS-NSQIP may not be sufficient to study the latest occurring adverse events. Additionally, both pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis tend to occur earlier after TKA than THA, and this should guide clinical surveillance efforts in patients undergoing those procedures. These findings also indicate that inpatient-only databases (such as the Nationwide Inpatient Sample) may fail to capture a very large proportion of postoperative adverse events, weakening the conclusions of many published studies using those databases. Level III, therapeutic study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 27 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 1%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 29 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 February 2022.
All research outputs
#4,102,788
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#877
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,383
of 444,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#7
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 444,885 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.