Rheumatology Advance Access published online on February 28, 2003
Rheumatology, doi:10.1093/rheumatology/keg196
Rheumatology © British Society for Rheumatology 2003; all rights reserved
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Original Papers
1 Departments of Rheumatology and Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Berne, 3010 Berne, Switzerland; MRC Health Services Research Collaboration, Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whiteladies Road, Bristol BS8 2PR
* Corresponding author. E-mail: peter.juni{at}bristol.ac.uk.
Received 11 June 2002
; accepted 22 November 2002
Objectives. To determine the population requirement for total knee replacement (TKR) in England Methods. Population-based study using an age/sex-stratified random sample of 28 080 individuals aged 35 yr and over. Incident disease was estimated from prevalence by statistical modelling. The New Zealand priority criteria for major joint replacement were used for case selection. Results. Patients with knee disease were less likely than those with equally severe hip disease to have been referred to a specialist, to have consulted an orthopaedic surgeon or to be on a waiting list for joint replacement. The estimated annual requirement of TKRs in England, based on New Zealand Scores alone, was 55 800 (95% CI 40 700-70 900), contrasting sharply with an annual provision of 29 300 actually observed. However, in contrast to previously reported hip replacement data, when patient willingness to undergo surgery was considered, this estimate decreased considerably. Conclusions. There appears to be an underprovision of TKR in England. This may be due in part to differences in perception of disease severity and likely response to surgery between patients and general practitioners on one hand, and rheumatologists and orthopaedic surgeons on the other.
Key words: Knee replacement surgery, Needs assessment, Population requirements.
Population requirement for primary knee replacement surgery: a cross-sectional study
2 MRC Health Services Research Collaboration, Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whiteladies Road, Bristol BS8 2PR
3 Division of Primary Health Care, University of Bristol, Cotham House, Cotham Hill, Bristol BS6 6JL, UK
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. M. Quintana, I. Arostegui, A. Escobar, J. Azkarate, J. I. Goenaga, and I. Lafuente Prevalence of Knee and Hip Osteoarthritis and the Appropriateness of Joint Replacement in an Older Population Arch Intern Med, July 28, 2008; 168(14): 1576 - 1584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Steel, D. Melzer, E. Gardener, and B. McWilliams Need for and receipt of hip and knee replacement--a national population survey Rheumatology, November 1, 2006; 45(11): 1437 - 1441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Dieppe The relationships of musculoskeletal disease to age, pain, poverty and behaviour Rheumatology, March 1, 2006; 45(3): 248 - 249. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P F K Yong, P C Milner, J N Payne, P A Lewis, and C Jennison Inequalities in access to knee joint replacements for people in need Ann Rheum Dis, November 1, 2004; 63(11): 1483 - 1489. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. N. Birrell Patterns of joint pain: lessons from epidemiology Rheumatology, April 1, 2004; 43(4): 408 - 409. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Underwood Community management of knee pain in older people: is knee pain the new back pain? Rheumatology, January 1, 2004; 43(1): 2 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C Jinks, M Lewis, and P Croft Health status after hip or knee arthroplasty Ann Rheum Dis, August 1, 2003; 62(8): 700 - 701. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|