Purpose: Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis (SAP) prevents surgical site infections (SSI). In orthopaedic surgery, the use of prolonged SAP (PSAP) has been reported in daily routine, despite guidelines advising against it. Therefore, we asked: What is the proportion of PSAP use, defined as administration of SAP ≥24 h after elective orthopaedic surgery? Are there patient- and surgery-related predictors of PSAP use?Methods: This cross-sectional analysis investigated 1292 patients who underwent elective orthopaedic surgery including total joint arthroplasties at one Swiss centre between 2015 and 2017. Patient comorbidities, surgical characteristics and occurrence of SSI at 90 days in PSAP group were compared to the SAP group (< 24 h post-operative).Results: PSAP use was 12% (155 of 1292). Patient-related factors associated with PSAP compared to the SAP group included older age (63 vs. 58y;p < 0.001), higher BMI (29 vs. 27 kg/m²;p < 0.001), ASA classification ≥3 (31% vs. 17%;p < 0.001) and lung disease (17% vs. 9%;p = 0.002). Surgery-related factors associated with PSAP were use of prosthetics (62% vs. 45%;p < 0.001), surgery of the knee (65% vs. 25%;p < 0.001), longer surgery duration (87 vs. 68 min;p < 0.001) and presence of drains (90% vs. 65%;p < 0.001). All four SSI occurred in the SAP group (0 vs. 4;p = 1.0). Surgeons administered PSAP with varying frequencies; proportions ranged from 0 to 33%.Conclusion: PSAP use and SSI proportions were lower than reported in the literature. Several patient- and surgery-related factors associated with PSAP use were identified and some were potentially modifiable. Also, experienced surgeons seemed to implement differing approaches regarding the duration of SAP administration.

The aging population and the associated demand for orthopedic surgeries are increasing health costs. Although the Diagnostic Related Groups (DRG) system was introduced to offer incentives for hospitals, concerns remain that reimbursements for older and frail patients do not cover all hospital expenses. We investigated further: (1) Does age influence net financial results in orthopedic surgery? (2) Are there patient or surgical factors that influence results? This retrospective, monocentric study compares costs and reimbursements for orthopedic patients in a tertiary care hospital in Switzerland between 2015 and 2017. The data of 1230 patients were analyzed. Overall, the net results for the hospital were positive, despite 19.5% of patients being treated at a loss. We did not find any correlation between age and profitability (p = 0.61). Patient-related factors associated with financial losses were female sex (p < 0.001) and diabetes (p = 0.013). Patients free of serious comorbidities (p = 0.012) or with a higher cost weight (p < 0.001) were more often profitable. A longer length of stay was associated with higher losses (p < 0.001). This is the first study to address the Swiss DRG reimbursement system in a broad orthopedic population, while also analyzing specific patient and surgical factors. Overall, the reimbursement system is fair, but could better account for certain interventions.

Background: No surgical intervention is without risk. Readmissions and reoperations after elective orthopedic surgery are common and are also stressful for the patient. It has been shown that a comprehensive ortho-medical co-management model decreases readmission rates in older patients suffering from hip fracture; but it is still unclear if this also applies to elective orthopedic surgery. The aim of the current study was to determine the proportion of unplanned readmissions or returns to operating room (for any reason) across a broad elective orthopedic population within 90 days after elective surgery. All cases took place in a tertiary care center using co-management care and were also assessed for risk factors leading to readmission or unplanned return to operating room (UROR). Methods: In this observational study, 1295 patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery between 2015 and 2017 at a tertiary care center in Switzerland were investigated. The proportion of reoperations and readmissions within 90 days was measured, and possible risk factors for reoperation or readmission were identified using logistic regression. Results: In our cohort, 3.2% (42 of 1295 patients) had an UROR or readmission. Sixteen patients were readmitted without requiring further surgery—nine of which due to medical and seven to surgical reasons. Patient-related factors associated with UROR and readmission were older age (67 vs. 60 years; p = 0.014), and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA PS) score ≥ 3 (43% vs. 18%; p < 0.001). Surgery-related factors were: implantation of foreign material (62% vs. 33%; p < 0.001), duration of operation (76 min. vs. 60 min; p < 0.001), and spine surgery (57% vs. 17%; p < 0.001). Notably, only spine surgery was also found to be independent risk factor. Conclusion: Rates of UROR during initial hospitalization and readmission were lower in the current study than described in the literature. However, several comorbidities and surgery-related risk factors were found to be associated with these events. Although no surgery is without risk, known threats should be reduced and every effort undertaken to minimize complications in high-risk populations. Further prospective controlled research is needed to investigate the potential benefits of a co-management model in elective orthopedic surgery.