Objectives Outcomes in total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA), such as allogeneic transfusions or extended length of stay (LoS), can be used to compare the performance of hospitals. However, there is much variation in these outcomes. This study aims to rank hospitals and to assess hospital differences of two outcomes in THA and TKA: allogeneic transfusions and extended LoS, and to additionally identify factors associated with these differences. Design Cross-sectional medical record review study. Setting Data were gathered in 23 Dutch hospitals. Participants 1163 THA and 986 TKA patient admissions. Outcomes Hospitals were ranked based on their observed/expected (O/E) ratios regarding allogeneic transfusion and extended LoS percentages (extended LoS was defined by postoperative stay >4 days). To assess the reliability of these rankings, we calculated which percentage of the existing variation was based on differences between hospitals as compared with random variation (after adjustment for variation in patient characteristics). Associations between hospital-specific factors and O/E ratios were used to explore potential sources of differences. Results The variation in O/E ratios between hospitals ranged from 0 to 4.4 for allogeneic transfusion, and from 0.08 to 2.7 for extended LoS. Variation in transfusion could in 21% be explained by hospital differences in THA and 34% in TKA. For extended LoS this was 71% in THA and 78% in TKA. Better performance (low O/E ratios) in transfusion was associated with more frequent tranexamic acid (TXA) use in TKA (R=-0.43, p=0.04). Better performance in extended LoS was associated with more frequent TXA use in THA (R=-0.45, p=0.03) and TKA (R=-0.65, p<0.001) and local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in TKA (R= -0.60, p=0.002). Conclusions Ranking hospitals based on allogeneic transfusion is unreliable due to small percentages of variation explained by hospital differences. Ranking based on extended LoS is more reliable. Hospitals using TXA and LIA have relatively fewer patients with transfusions and extended LoS.@en

Background: Perioperative autologous blood salvage and preoperative erythropoietin are not (cost) effective to reduce allogeneic transfusion in primary hip and knee arthroplasty, but are still used. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a theoretically informed multifaceted strategy to de-implement these low-value blood management techniques. Methods: Twenty-one Dutch hospitals participated in this pragmatic cluster-randomized trial. At baseline, data were gathered for 924 patients from 10 intervention and 1040 patients from 11 control hospitals undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. The intervention included a multifaceted de-implementation strategy which consisted of interactive education, feedback on blood management performance, and a comparison with benchmark hospitals, aimed at orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists. After the intervention, data were gathered for 997 patients from the intervention and 1096 patients from the control hospitals. The randomization outcome was revealed after the baseline measurement. Primary outcomes were use of blood salvage and erythropoietin. Secondary outcomes included postoperative hemoglobin, length of stay, allogeneic transfusions, and use of local infiltration analgesia (LIA) and tranexamic acid (TXA). Results: The use of blood salvage (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.30) and erythropoietin (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.97) reduced significantly over time, but did not differ between intervention and control hospitals (blood salvage OR 1.74 95% CI 0.27 to 11.39, erythropoietin OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.26 to 6.84). Postoperative hemoglobin levels were significantly higher (β 0.21, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.34) and length of stay shorter (β -0.36, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.09) in hospitals receiving the multifaceted strategy, compared with control hospitals and after adjustment for baseline. Transfusions did not differ between the intervention and control hospitals (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.78). Both LIA (OR 0.0, 95% CI 0.0 to 0.0) and TXA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.5) were significantly associated with the reduction in blood salvage over time. Conclusions: Blood salvage and erythropoietin use reduced over time, but not differently between intervention and control hospitals. The reduction in blood salvage was associated with increased use of local infiltration analgesia and tranexamic acid, suggesting that de-implementation is assisted by the substitution of techniques. The reduction in blood salvage and erythropoietin did not lead to a deterioration in patient-related secondary outcomes. Trial registration: www.trialregister.nl, NTR4044@en

Background and Objectives: To determine the value of erythropoietin in reducing allogeneic transfusions, it is important to assess the effects, safety and costs for individual indications. Previous studies neither compared the effects of erythropoietin between total hip and total knee arthroplasty, nor evaluated the safety or costs. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effects of erythropoietin in total hip and knee arthroplasty separately. Safety and costs were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of erythropoietin in total hip and knee arthroplasty until April 2014. Study data were extracted using standardized forms and pooled using a random-effects model. Strength of the evidence was evaluated using Cochrane's Collaboration's tool for risk of bias assessment. Results: Seven studies were included (2439 patients). Erythropoietin significantly reduced exposure to allogeneic transfusion in both hip (RR 0·45; 95%CI 0·33–0·61) and knee (RR 0·38; 95%CI 0·27–0·53) arthroplasty, without differences between indications (P = 0·44). Mean number of transfused red blood cell units was significantly decreased in erythropoietin-treated patients (mean difference −0·57; 95%CI −0·86 to −0·29)(unable to split). No differences in thromboembolic or adverse events were found. Only one study evaluated costs, so that no pooled cost-effectiveness estimates could be given. Conclusion: Erythropoietin is effective in both hip and knee arthroplasty and can be considered as safe. However, the decision to use erythropoietin on a routine base should be balanced against its costs, which may be relatively high.@en

Background: Cell salvage is used to reduce allogeneic red blood-cell (RBC) transfusions in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We performed a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of cell salvage to reduce transfusions in THA and TKA separately, and to examine whether recent trials change the conclusions frompreviousmeta-analyses. Methods: We searched MEDLINE through January 2013 for randomized clinical trials evaluating the effects of cell salvage in THA and TKA. Trial results were extracted using standardized forms and pooled using a random-effects model. Methodological quality of the trials was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for risk-of-bias assessment. Results: Forty-three trials (5631 patients) were included. Overall, cell salvage reduced the exposure to allogeneic RBC transfusion in THA (risk ratio [RR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.85) and TKA (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.68). However, trials published in 2010 to 2012, with a lower risk of bias, showed no significant effect of cell salvage in THA (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.02) and TKA (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.31), suggesting that the treatment policy regarding transfusion may have changed over time. Conclusions: Looking at all trials, cell salvage still significantly reduced the RBC exposure rate and the volume of RBCs transfused in both THA and TKA. However, in trials published more recently (2010 to 2012), cell salvage reduced neither the exposure rate nor the volume of RBCs transfused in THA and TKA, most likely explained by changes in blood transfusion management. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.@en

Background: Despite evidence that erythropoietin and intra- and postoperative blood salvage are expensive techniques considered to be non-cost-effective in primary elective total hip and knee arthroplasties in the Netherlands, Dutch medical professionals use them frequently to prevent the need for allogeneic transfusion. To actually change physicians' practice, a tailored strategy aimed at barriers that hinder physicians in abandoning the use of erythropoietin and perioperative blood salvage was systematically developed. The study aims to examine the effectiveness, feasibility and costs of this tailored de-implementation strategy compared to a control strategy. Methods/design: A cluster randomized controlled trial including an effect, process and economic evaluation will be conducted in a minimum of 20 Dutch hospitals. Randomisation takes place at hospital level. The hospitals in the intervention group will receive a tailored de-implementation strategy that consists of four components: interactive education, feedback in educational outreach visits, electronically sent reports on hospital performance (all aimed at orthopedic surgeons and anesthesiologists), and information letters or emails aimed at other involved professionals within the intervention hospital (transfusion committee, OR-personnel, pharmacists). The hospitals in the control group will receive a control strategy (i.e., passive dissemination of available evidence). Outcomes will be measured at patient level, using retrospective medical record review. This will be done in all hospitals at baseline and after completion of the intervention period. The primary outcome of the effect evaluation is the percentage of patients undergoing primary elective total hip or knee arthroplasty in which erythropoietin or perioperative blood salvage is applied. The actual exposure to the tailored strategy and users' experiences will be assessed in the process evaluation. In the economic evaluation, the costs of the tailored strategy and the control strategy in relation to the difference in their effectiveness will be compared. Discussion: This study will show whether a systematically developed tailored strategy is more effective for de-implementation of non-cost-effective blood saving measures than the control strategy. This knowledge can be used in national and international initiatives to make healthcare more efficient. It also provides more generalized knowledge regarding de-implementation strategies.

@en

Background Despite evidence that the blood-saving measures (BSMs) erythropoietin (EPO) and intra- and postoperative blood salvage are not (cost-)effective in primary elective total hip and knee arthroplasties, they are used frequently in Dutch hospitals. This study aims to assess the impact of barriers associated with the intention of physicians to stop BSMs.Study Design and Methods A survey among 400 orthopedic surgeons and 400 anesthesiologists within the Netherlands was performed. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify barriers associated with intention to stop BSMs.Results A total of 153 (40%) orthopedic surgeons and 100 (27%) anesthesiologists responded. Of all responders 67% used EPO, perioperative blood salvage, or a combination. After reading the evidence on non-cost-effective BSMs, 50% of respondents intended to stop EPO and 53% to stop perioperative blood salvage. In general, barriers perceived most frequently were lack of attention for blood management (90% of respondents), department priority to prevent transfusions (88%), and patient characteristics such as comorbidity (81%). Barriers significantly associated with intention to stop EPO were lack of interest to save money and the impact of other involved parties. Barriers significantly associated with intention to stop perioperative blood salvage were concerns about patient safety, lack of alternatives, losing experience with the technique, and lack of interest to save money.Conclusion Physicians experience barriers to stop using BSMs, related to their own technical skills, patient safety, current blood management policy, and lack of interest to save money. These barriers should be targeted in strategies to make BSM use cost-effective.@en

Background: Blood loss in hip and knee arthroplasties may necessitate allogeneic blood transfusions. Different blood-saving measures (BSMs) were introduced to reduce these transfusions. Purpose of the present study was to assess the frequency of BSM use, stratified by type and hospital setting of orthopaedic departments in the Netherlands. Methods. An internet-based questionnaire was sent to all heads of orthopaedic departments of Dutch hospitals and private clinics (n = 99). Questions were asked on how often BSMs were used, reported on a 5-point Likert scale (never, almost never, regularly, almost always, always). In addition there were questions about discontinuation of anticoagulants preoperatively, the number of annually performed arthroplasties (size) and hospital setting. Results: The survey was completed by 81 (82%) departments. BSMs used frequently (regularly, almost always, always) were erythropoietine (EPO), with 55 (68%) departments being frequent users; acute normovolemic hemodilution, used frequently in 26 (32%) departments; cell saver in 25 (31%) and postoperative drainage and re-infusion in 56 (69%) departments. When compared by size, frequent EPO use was more common in large departments (with 22 (88%) large departments being frequent users versus 13 (63%) small departments and 16 (55%) intermediate departments, p = 0.03). No differences by size or type were observed for other BSMs. Conclusions: Compared with previous survey's there is a tremendous increase in use of BSMs. EPO and autologous blood salvage techniques are the most often used modalities. Costs might be saved if use of non-cost-effective BSMs is stopped.

@en

Background: Total hip and knee arthroplasties are two of the most commonly performed procedures in orthopedic surgery. Different blood-saving measures (BSMs) are used to reduce the often-needed allogenic blood transfusions in these procedures. A recent large randomized controlled trial showed it is not cost effective to use the BSMs of erythropoietin and perioperative autologous blood salvage in elective primary hip and knee arthroplasties. Despite dissemination of these study results, medical professionals keep using these BSMs. To actually change practice, an implementation strategy is needed that is based on a good understanding of target groups and settings and the psychological constructs that predict behavior of medical professionals. However, detailed insight into these issuses is lacking. Therefore, this study aims to explore which groups of professionals should be targeted at which settings, as well as relevant barriers and facilitators that should be taken into acount in the strategy to implement evidence-based, cost-effective blood transfusion management and to de-implement BSMs.Methods: The study consists of three phases. First, a questionnaire survey among all Dutch orthopedic hospital departments and independent treatment centers (n = 99) will be conducted to analyze current blood management practice. Second, semistructured interviews will be held among 10 orthopedic surgeons and 10 anesthesiologists to identify barriers and facilitators that are relevant for the uptake of cost-effective blood transfusion management. Interview questions will be based on the Theoretical Domains Interview framework. The interviews will be followed by a questionnaire survey among 800 medical professionals in orthopedics and anesthesiology (400 professionals per discipline) in which the identified barriers and facilitators will be ranked by frequency and importance. Finally, an implementation strategy will be developed based on the results from the previous phases, using principles of intervention mapping and an expert panel.Discussion: The developed strategy for cost-effective blood transfusion management by de-implementing BSMs is likely to reduce costs for elective hip and knee arthroplasties. In addition, this study will lead to generalized knowledge regarding relevant factors for the de-implementation of non-cost-effective interventions and insight in the differences between implementation and de-implementation strategies.

@en