Comparison of Two Previously Validated Risk Assessment and Prediction Tool Models in Extended Length of Stay Patients Following total Hip Arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies have attempted to validate the risk assessment and prediction tool (RAPT) in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients. The purpose of this study was to: (1) identify patients who had an extended length of stay (LOS) following THA; and (2) compare the accuracy of 2 previously validated RAPT models.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all primary THA patients from 2014 to 2021 who had a completed RAPT score. Youden's J computational analysis was used to determine the LOS where facility discharge was statistically more likely. Based on the cut-offs proposed by Oldmeadow and Dibra, patients were separated into high- (O: 1 to 5 versus D: 1 to 3), medium- (O: 6 to 9 versus D: 4 to 7), and low- (O: 10 to 12 versus D: 8 to 12) risk groups.

RESULTS

We determined that an LOS of greater than 2 days resulted in a higher chance of facility discharge. In these patients (n = 717), the overall predictive accuracy (PA) of the RAPT was 79.8%. The Dibra model had a higher PA in the high-risk group (D: 68.2 versus O: 61.2% facility discharge). The Oldmeadow model had a higher PA in the medium-risk (O: 78.7 versus D: 61.4% home discharge) and low-risk (O: 97.0 versus D. 92.5% home discharge) groups.

CONCLUSIONS

As institutions continue to optimize LOS, the RAPT may need to be defined in the context of a patient's hospital stay. In patients requiring an LOS of greater than 2 days, the originally established RAPT cut-offs may be more accurate in predicting discharge disposition.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III Retrospective Cohort Study.