Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient Surveillance in Total Joint Arthroplasty

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rapid Recovery in Total Joint Arthroplasty

  • 533 Accesses

Abstract

Effective patient–provider communication is essential to the delivery of quality healthcare. Recent policy changes and technological advancements have catalyzed the implementation of various strategies to augment patient–provider communication, particularly in the field of total joint arthroplasty. Telemedical technologies, such as automated text messaging [short message service (SMS)], mobile applications, web-based platforms, structured telephone calls, videoconferencing, and wearable technologies, have been used as a means to provide patients with reminders, instructional content, and motivational messages, enhance data collection, and facilitate patient–provider communication. The incorporation of such forms of communication into healthcare not only has the potential to make providing and receiving healthcare more convenient, but also may increase the quality of care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ong LM, de Haes JC, Hoos AM, Lammes FB. Doctor–patient communication: a review of the literature. Soc Sci Med 1982. 1995;40(7):903–18.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Harmon G, Lefante J, Krousel-Wood M. Overcoming barriers: the role of providers in improving patient adherence to antihypertensive medications. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2006;21(4):310–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Alazri MH, Neal RD. The association between satisfaction with services provided in primary care and outcomes in Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med J Br Diabet Assoc. 2003;20(6):486–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hall JA, Roter DL, Rand CS. Communication of affect between patient and physician. J Health Soc Behav. 1981;22(1):18–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Little P, et al. Observational study of effect of patient centredness and positive approach on outcomes of general practice consultations. BMJ. 2001;323(7318):908–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Schoenthaler A, Kalet A, Nicholson J, Lipkin M. Does improving patient-practitioner communication improve clinical outcomes in patients with cardiovascular diseases? A systematic review of the evidence. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;96(1):3–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Mechanic RE. Mandatory medicare bundled payment–is it ready for prime time? N Engl J Med. 2015;373(14):1291–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Medicare program; Comprehensive care for joint replacement payment model for acute care hospitals furnishing lower extremity joint replacement services. 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Luzzi AJ, Crizer MP, Fleischman AN, Foltz C, Parvizi J. The role of perioperative surveillance in 90-day total joint arthroplasty care. J Arthroplast. 2018;33(10):3125–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Day MA, et al. Increasing perioperative communication with automated mobile phone messaging in total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33(1):19–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sharareh B, Schwarzkopf R. Effectiveness of telemedical applications in postoperative follow-up after total joint arthroplasty. J. Arthroplast. 2014;29(5):918–922.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wilson LS, Maeder AJ. Recent directions in telemedicine: review of trends in research and practice. Healthc Inform Res. Oct. 2015;21(4):213–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Evaluating Clinical Applications of Telemedicine. Telemedicine: a guide to assessing telecommunications in health care. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (US); 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Whitten P, Holtz B, LaPlante C. Telemedicine. Appl Clin Inform. 2010;1(2):132–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Wittson CL, Affleck DC, Johnson V. Two-way television in group therapy. Ment Hosp. 1961;12:22–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Adler-Milstein J, Kvedar J, Bates DW. Telehealth among US hospitals: several factors, including state reimbursement and licensure policies, influence adoption. Health Aff Proj Hope. 2014;33(2):207–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Telemedicine market. Growth, trends, and forecast (2019–2024). [Online]. Available: https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/global-telemedicine-market-industry. Accessed 25 Apr 2019.

  18. Chen M, Li P, Lin F. Influence of structured telephone follow-up on patient compliance with rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:257–64.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Bahadori S, Immins T, Wainwright TW. A review of wearable motion tracking systems used in rehabilitation following hip and knee replacement. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2018;5:205566831877181.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sathiyakumar V, Apfeld JC, Obremskey WT, Thakore RV, Sethi MK. Prospective randomized controlled trial using telemedicine for follow-ups in an orthopedic trauma population: a pilot study. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(3):e139–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Reider-Demer M, Raja P, Martin N, Schwinger M, Babayan D. Prospective and retrospective study of videoconference telemedicine follow-up after elective neurosurgery: results of a pilot program. Neurosurg Rev. 2018;41(2):497–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Premkumar A, et al. A novel mobile phone text messaging platform improves collection of patient-reported post-operative pain and opioid use following orthopedic surgery. HSS J. 2019;15(1):37–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bell K, et al. Patient adoption and utilization of a web-based and mobile-based portal for collecting outcomes after elective orthopedic surgery. Am J Med Qual. 2018;33(6):649–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Müller KI, Alstadhaug KB, Bekkelund SI. Acceptability, feasibility, and cost of telemedicine for nonacute headaches: a randomized study comparing video and traditional consultations. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(5):e140.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Azulay R, Valinsky L, Hershkowitz F, Magnezi R. Repeated automated mobile text messaging reminders for follow-up of positive fecal occult blood tests: randomized controlled trial. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2019;7(2):e11114.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Wald DS, Bestwick JP, Raiman L, Brendell R, Wald NJ. Randomised trial of text messaging on adherence to cardiovascular preventive treatment (INTERACT Trial). PLoS ONE. 2014;9(12)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Martínez-Ramos C, Cerdán MT, López RS. Mobile phone-based telemedicine system for the home follow-up of patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. Telemed J E-Health. 2009;15(6):531–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. O’Connor M, et al. Using telehealth to reduce all-cause 30-day hospital readmissions among heart failure patients receiving skilled home health services. Appl Clin Inform. 2016;7(2):238–47.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Gillespie SM, et al. Reducing emergency department utilization through engagement in telemedicine by senior living communities. Telemed E-Health. 2016;22(6):489–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lu K, et al. Use of short message service and smartphone applications in the management of surgical patients: a systematic review. Telemed E-Health. 2017;24(6):406–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Smith MJ, Reiter MJ, Crist BD, Schultz LG, Choma TJ. Improving patient satisfaction through computer-based questionnaires. Orthopedics. 2016;39(1):e31–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Palmer C, et al. Are electronic and paper questionnaires equivalent to assess patients with overactive bladder? J Urol. 2018;200(2):369–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Demographics of mobile device ownership and adoption in the United States. Pew Research Center. [Online]. Available: https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/. Accessed: 26 Apr 2019.

  34. Campbell KJ, et al. A novel, automated text-messaging system is effective in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(2):145–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chen Z, Fang L, Chen L, Dai H. Comparison of an SMS text messaging and phone reminder to improve attendance at a health promotion center: a randomized controlled trial. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2008;9(1):34–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Wong CKH, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a short message service intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes from impaired glucose tolerance. J Diabetes Res. 2016, 2016:1219581.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Pandey A, Krumme AA, Patel T, Choudhry NK. The impact of text messaging on medication adherence and exercise among postmyocardial infarction patients: randomized controlled pilot trial. JMIR MHealth UHealth. 2017;5(8):e110.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Hawkins SD, Koch SB, Williford PM, Feldman SR, Pearce DJ. Web app- and text message-based patient education in Mohs micrographic surgery-a randomized controlled trial. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44(7):924–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Plate JF, Ryan SP, Bergen MA, Hong CS, Attarian DE, Seyler TM. Utilization of an electronic patient portal following total joint arthroplasty does not decrease readmissions. J Arthroplast. 2019;34(2):211–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. U.S. households with PC/computer at home 2016. Statistic. Statista. [Online]. Available: https://www.statista.com/statistics/214641/household-adoption-rate-of-computer-in-the-us-since-1997/. Accessed 26 Apr 2019.

  41. Zuidgeest M, Hendriks M, Koopman L, Spreeuwenberg P, Rademakers J. A comparison of a postal survey and mixed-mode survey using a questionnaire on patients’ experiences with breast care. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(3):e68.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Heiervang E, Goodman R. Advantages and limitations of web-based surveys: evidence from a child mental health survey. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2011;46(1):69–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Edwards P. Questionnaires in clinical trials: guidelines for optimal design and administration. Trials. 2010;11:2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. A randomised trial and economic evaluation of the effect of response mode on response rate, response bias, and item non-response in a survey of doctors. BMC Medical Research Methodology. Full Text. [Online]. Available: https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-11-126. Accessed: 26 Apr 2019.

  45. McMaster HS, LeardMann CA, Speigle S, Dillman DA. An experimental comparison of web-push vs. paper-only survey procedures for conducting an in-depth health survey of military spouses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17:73.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: a meta-analysis – Tse-Hua Shih, Xitao Fan. 2008. [Online]. Available: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1525822X08317085. Accessed 26 Apr 2019.

  47. Manfreda KL, Bosnjak M, Berzelak J, Haas I, Vehovar V. Web surveys versus other survey modes: a meta-analysis comparing response rates. Int J Mark Res. 2008;50(1):79–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Schamber EM, Takemoto SK, Chenok KE, Bozic KJ. Barriers to completion of patient reported outcome measures. J Arthroplast. 2013;28(9):1449–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Zhou YY, Garrido T, Chin HL, Wiesenthal AM, Liang LL. Patient access to an electronic health record with secure messaging: impact on primary care utilization. Am J Manag Care. 2007;13(7):418–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. North F, et al. Impact of patient portal secure messages and electronic visits on adult primary care office visits. Telemed J E Health. 2014;20(3):192–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Palen TE, Ross C, Powers JD, Xu S. Association of online patient access to clinicians and medical records with use of clinical services. JAMA. 2012;308(19):2012–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Piqueras M, et al. Effectiveness of an interactive virtual telerehabilitation system in patients after total knee arthoplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Rehabil Med. 2013;45(4):392–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Park KH, Song MR. The effects of postdischarge telephone counseling and short message service on the knee function, activities of daily living, and life satisfaction of patients undergoing total knee replacement. Orthop Nurs. 2017;36(3):229–36.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Hällfors E, Saku SA, Mäkinen TJ, Madanat R. A consultation phone service for patients with total joint arthroplasty may reduce unnecessary emergency department visits. J Arthroplast. 2018;33(3):650–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Kelly MP, Prentice HA, Wang W, Fasig BH, Sheth DS, Paxton EW. Reasons for ninety-day emergency visits and readmissions after elective total joint arthroplasty: results from a US integrated healthcare system. J Arthroplast. 2018;33(7):2075–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Russell TG, Buttrum P, Wootton R, Jull GA. Internet-based outpatient telerehabilitation for patients following total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(2):113–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Tousignant M, Moffet H, Boissy P, Corriveau H, Cabana F, Marquis F. A randomized controlled trial of home telerehabilitation for post-knee arthroplasty. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17(4):195–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Luzzi AJ, Fleischman AN, Matthews CN, Crizer MP, Wilsman J, Parvizi J. The ‘bundle busters’: incidence and costs of postacute complications following total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33(9):2734–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Izmailova ES, Wagner JA, Perakslis ED. Wearable devices in clinical trials: hype and hypothesis. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018;104(1):42–52.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Jiang S, Xiang J, Gao X, Guo K, Liu B. The comparison of telerehabilitation and face-to-face rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24(4):257–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Shukla H, Nair SR, Thakker D. Role of telerehabilitation in patients following total knee arthroplasty: evidence from a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2017;23(2):339–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Andrew Luzzi

  2. Department of Anesthesiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Andrew Fleischman

  3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Javad Parvizi

Authors
  1. Andrew Luzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew Fleischman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Javad Parvizi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew Luzzi .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Northwell Orthopedic Institute, New York, NY, USA

    Giles R. Scuderi

  2. The Orthopaedic Center of New Jersey, Somerset, NJ, USA

    Alfred J. Tria

  3. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA

    Fred D. Cushner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Luzzi, A., Fleischman, A., Parvizi, J. (2020). Patient Surveillance in Total Joint Arthroplasty. In: Scuderi, G., Tria, A., Cushner, F. (eds) Rapid Recovery in Total Joint Arthroplasty. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41223-4_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41223-4_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-41222-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-41223-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation