EPIDEMIOLOGY OF REVISION PROCEDURES FOLLOWING PRIMARY HIP AND KNEE ARTHROPLASTY FOR OSTEOARTHRITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revision surgery is an important outcome of hip and knee arthroplasty among patients with osteoarthritis (OA). The objective of this study was to determine the risk of revision over time in a large, geographically defined population in North America, and to assess the effects of age, sex, and socioeconomic status (SES) on knee and hip revision rates in this population. We used data on admissions to all acute care hospitals in British Columbia (BC), Canada (population of four million people) from 1986 until 2004 (eighteen years of follow-up). Primary knee and hip replacement surgery for OA and revision procedures were identified using diagnostic (ICD-9, ICD-10) codes and surgical procedure codes. We excluded cases admitted due to injury or neoplasm. SES was assigned based on residential address linked to census data at the level of enumeration area (ecological variable), and analyzed according to quintiles or deciles of the distribution. In the analysis, we used Kaplan-Meier survival curves to describe the risk of first revision following first primary replacement surgery over time and parametric (Weibull) survival regression models to analyze the effects of joint (hip vs. knee) age, sex, and SES on revision rates. Death, emigration, and another primary joint replacement were treated as censoring events. Between 1986 and 2004, we observed 24,169 first primary hip replacements and 22,875 first primary knee replacements. In these patients, there were 1,313 hip revisions and 914 knee revisions following a primary replacement. The risk of revision at five, ten and fifteen years after primary replacement according to joint and sex were identified The overall risks were 10.1% for the hip and 8.7% for the knee at ten years, and 15.5% and 14.7%, respectively, at fifteen years. Risk of revision (%) following first primary joint replacement surgery Hip Knee Years Men Women Men Women 5 5.0 3.9 4.6 3.8 10 11.0 9.4 9.7 8.0 15 17.8 14.1 18.5 12.4 In a multivariate survival regression model including joint, age, sex, and SES, only age and sex were significantly associated with revisions. The hazard ratio was 1.2 for men compared with women (p This is one of the largest and longest cohort studies in North America to look at the epidemiology of revision procedures following hip and knee replacement for OA. Higher rates in men and in younger persons are consistent with previous reports. The lack of association between revision risk and SES in BC is an important finding given current concerns about socioeconomic disparities in access to and outcomes of treatment for OA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".