Purpose: In the existing literature, isolated femoral head and polyethylene liner exchange is commonly performed in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for a variety of indications with mixed outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate patient outcomes following head-liner exchange and risk factors associated with failure in THA. Materials and Methods: A retrospective chart review from May 2016 to November 2023 was conducted on patients who underwent isolated head-liner exchange at two institutions. Patients had minimum 1-year follow-up periods. For each patient, data such as indication for revision, surgical approach, revision head size, immediate and short-term complications, postoperative disposition, 90-day readmissions, and re-operations were recorded. Results: Out of 175 patients, there were 24 readmissions/emergency department visits within 90 postoperative days (13.7%), 21 subsequent revision surgeries (12.0%), 21 postoperative dislocations (12.0%), and 20 immediate postoperative complications (11.4%). A statistically significant association was demonstrated between indication for revision and postoperative instability (P=0.04). Patients operated upon for instability had higher rates of postoperative instability. Furthermore, patients with reported preoperative dislocation events had higher incidences of postoperative dislocations. Patients discharged to skilled nursing facilities (SNF) were associated with an increased number of hospital readmissions within 90 days of surgery, reoperation, and postoperative dislocation (P<0.05). No statistically significant associations were found between surgical approach and complications. Conclusion This study suggests that, in the context of isolated head-liner exchanges, factors such as preoperative dislocation history, indication for revision, and discharge to SNF are associated with poorer outcomes and complications.

Background:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a paradigm shift in global health,casting a previously niche academic discipline into a headline dominating field of research.However,accurate information on the delivery of global health education (GHE) at a university level is lacking.This study aims to assess current GHE practices in U.K.universities,by identifying the availability of dedicated global health qualifications,as well as the breadth of inclusion of GHE topics across university course content.Methods:Universities selected were the top 25 recipients of MRC funding in 2015-2016,as well as universi-ties who were included in previous iterations of the "Global Health League Table".We used the Consortium of Universities for Global Health "GHE Competencies Toolkit" to identify the presence of global health content across university global health and other course offerings.Universities were additionally judged on opportunities available in global health and on the presence of sustainable partnerships.Results:Our results showed that 20 universities (74％) offer a post-graduate global health related course,with 9(33％) offering an undergraduate global health related course.13 (48％) were identified as centers of global health excellence.Just 12 (44％) universities had registered sustainable partnerships with Tropical Health and Education Trust.The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine was identified as the top deliverer of GHE,with the Universities of Leicester and the Universities of Exeter joint bottom.We were unable to standardize quality assessments in this iteration of the project,but the release of student feedback to future assessors would help to improve the reliability of this study methodology.Additionally,much of our data was based on information available online,and thus some aspects of degree courses not published publicly may not have been accounted for in our scoring.Conclusion:Those institutions wishing to improve their delivery of GHE should consider the establishment of a postgraduate or undergraduate degree course.Breadth of global health content across curricular was a major discriminating factor between institutions,and we would advise universities to consider including more global health topics across their curricular-especially in light of the intersectional impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.