Patient reported outcomes in orthopaedics

Defining the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for PROMIS After Total Ankle Replacement

BACKGROUND

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), are a key element of evaluating success after total ankle replacement (TAR), many do not explicitly state a key factor of postoperative success: is the patient satisfied with their outcome after TAR? The patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) represents the symptom threshold beyond which patients consider themselves well. This study aimed to establish the PROMIS thresholds for the PASS in a primary cohort of TAR patients.

METHODS

This single-institution study included 127 primary TAR patients with preoperative and 2-year postoperative PROMIS scores. At 2 years postoperatively, patients answered 2 PASS anchor questions (Satisfaction, Delighted-Terrible scale) with Likert-scale responses. PASS thresholds with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated from PROMIS scores using an anchor-based method. Using a bootstrapping technique with 1,000 iterations, the Youden index was calculated to determine the best specificity and sensitivity coordinates to maximize their combination. Finally, preoperative variables associated with the likelihood of achieving the PASS were assessed.

RESULTS

There was a strong association between PASS thresholds and PROMIS domains, especially Pain Interference (PASS threshold of <56.0, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.940), Pain Intensity (<48.4, AUC = 0.936), and Physical Function (>44.7, AUC = 0.883). The likelihood of achieving the PASS was not affected by age, race, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, body mass index, or severity of ankle deformity. Patients with worse preoperative Physical Function and Global Mental Health scores were less likely to meet the PASS threshold for Physical Function postoperatively (p = 0.028 and 0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

The ability to reach the PASS after TAR was most strongly associated with postoperative PROMIS pain scores. However, PASS thresholds were generally poorer than population means. This demonstrates that patients do not need to reach normal pain or physical function levels to have an acceptable symptom state after TAR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Trochleoplasty Provides Good Outcomes for Recurrent Patellofemoral Dislocations with No Clear Superiority across Different Techniques

Background: Literature is sparse on outcome comparisons between different trochleoplasty techniques in the treatment of patella instability. To date, it is unclear whether there is a technique that offers superior outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare and evaluate the outcomes of trochleoplasty techniques in the treatment of patellofemoral instability in trochlea dysplasia to establish whether there is an ideal choice of trochleoplasty technique for superior outcomes. Methods: 21 studies involving 880 knees were included. The mean age of the patients was 21.7 years (range 8-49 years). Mean follow-up timeframe of 43.5 months (range 8.8-100 months). Clinical outcomes assessed included rates of recurrence of patellofemoral dislocation, patient satisfaction, Kujala score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Tegner score, and Lysholm score. Egger's test showed no publication bias across all outcomes assessed. Results: Favourable results were seen across all outcomes assessed and patient satisfaction. Improvements were seen with Kujala, IKDC, and Lysholm scores. Tegner scores showed good return to function. Post-operative dislocation and complication rates were low across the different techniques. Meta-regression for Kujala and IKDC scores showed good outcomes regardless of trochleoplasty technique used (Kujala, p = 0.549, relative risk 492.06; IKDC, p = 0.193, RR 0.001). The exact risk that trochleoplasty poses to the cartilage remains uncertain, as no study had a conservatively managed arm for comparison. Conclusions: Trochleoplasty yielded good outcomes irrespective of technique used with no clear superiority demonstrated in any technique in terms of outcome scores, satisfaction, post-operative dislocation rates or complications.

Dedicated locking plate reduces non-union risk in open ankle fusion in obese patients

INTRODUCTION

Obesity is a growing public health concern. In ankle osteoarthritis, non-conservative treatment in advanced stages consists in ankle fusion, or else total ankle replacement, for which obesity is a relative contraindication. One of main complications of ankle fusion is non-union. Devascularization, obesity and fixation material are all factors involved in postoperative non-union, and have to be taken into account in surgical strategy for reliable results. The objective of this study was to compare the rate of ankle non-union in obese patients using quadruple screwing or a dedicated locking plate. The hypothesis was that the locking plate limits the risk of non-union in this population.

METHODS

All patients were obese (BMI>30kg/m2) and presented ankle osteoarthritis with>10° intra-articular deformity. The approach and joint preparation were performed via an anteromedial approach. Group S was composed of 32 patients, operated on by quadruple screwing; group P comprised 10 patients operated on using a dedicated locking plate. The main endpoint was a significant difference in the rate of non-union between the 2 groups. The secondary endpoint was improvement in pre- and 6-month postoperative AOFAS score.

RESULTS

Group S presented 31% non-union (10/32) and group P 0% (0/10) (p<0.05). Postoperative AOFAS score was significantly higher in group P: 67.8±10.4 [range, 40-92] vs. 83.1±8.0 [range, 64-92] (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The dedicated anterior locking plate is a technique of choice for ankle fusion in obese patients with intra-articular deformity>10°, to limit the risk of non-union.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective study.

What are the common factors that lead to the failure to achieve minimal clinically important difference after shoulder surgery? A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The goal of this research is to identify the factors that negatively impact the achievement of the minimum clinically significant change (MCID) for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score within the realm of various orthopedic shoulder procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review of studies published from 2002 to 2023, utilizing OvidMedline and PubMed databases. Our search criteria included terms such as "minimal clinically important difference" or "MCID" along with associated MeSH terms, in addition to "American shoulder and elbow surgeon" or "ASES." We selectively included primary investigations that assessed factors linked to the failure to achieve MCID for the ASES score subsequent to orthopedic shoulder procedures, while excluding papers addressing anatomical, surgical, or injury-related aspects.

RESULTS

Our analysis identified 149 full-text articles, leading to the inclusion of 12 studies for detailed analysis. The selected studies investigated outcomes following various orthopedic shoulder procedures, encompassing biceps tenodesis, total shoulder arthroplasty, and rotator cuff repair. Notably, factors, such as gender, body mass index, diabetes, smoking habits, opioid usage, depression, anxiety, workers' compensation, occupational satisfaction, and the preoperative ASES score, were all associated with the inability to attain MCID.

CONCLUSION

In summary, numerous factors exert a negative influence on the attainment of MCID following shoulder procedures, and these factors appear to be irrespective of the specific surgical technique employed. Patients presenting with these factors may perceive their surgical outcomes as less successful when compared to those without these factors. Identifying these factors can enable healthcare providers to provide more effective counseling to patients regarding their expected outcomes and rehabilitation course. Furthermore, these findings can aid in the development of a screening tool to better identify these risk factors and optimize them before surgery.

Who Benefits From Hip Arthroplasty or Knee Arthroplasty? Preoperative Patient-reported Outcome Thresholds Predict Meaningful Improvement

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroplasty (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA) are high-volume procedures. However, there is a debate about the quality of indication; that is, whether surgery is truly indicated in all patients. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may be used to determine preoperative thresholds to differentiate patients who will likely benefit from surgery from those who will not.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What were the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) for three commonly used PROMs in a large population of patients undergoing HA or KA treated in a general orthopaedic practice? (2) Do patients who reach the MCID differ in important ways from those who do not? (3) What preoperative PROM score thresholds best distinguish patients who achieve a meaningful improvement 12 months postsurgery from those who do not? (4) Do patients with preoperative PROM scores below thresholds still experience gains after surgery?

METHODS

Between October 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, 4182 patients undergoing HA and 3645 patients undergoing KA agreed to be part of the PROMoting Quality study and were hence included by study nurses in one of nine participating German hospitals. From a selected group of 1843 patients with HA and 1546 with KA, we derived MCIDs using the anchor-based change difference method to determine meaningful improvements. Second, we estimated which preoperative PROM score thresholds best distinguish patients who achieve an MCID from those who do not, using the preoperative PROM scores that maximized the Youden index. PROMs were Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function short form (HOOS-PS) (scored 0 to 100 points; lower indicates better health), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function short form (KOOS-PS) (scored 0 to 100 points; lower indicates better health), EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) (scored -0.661 to 1 points; higher indicates better health), and a 10-point VAS for pain (perceived pain in the joint under consideration for surgery within the past 7 days) (scored 0 to 10 points; lower indicates better health). The performance of derived thresholds is reported using the Youden index, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, geometric mean as a measure of central tendency, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

MCIDs for the EQ-5D-5L were 0.2 for HA and 0.2 for KA, with a maximum of 1 point, where higher values represented better health-related quality of life. For the pain scale, they were -0.9 for HA and -0.7 for KA, of 10 points (maximum), where lower scores represent lower pain. For the HOOS-PS, the MCID was -10, and for the KOOS-PS it was -5 of 100 points, where lower scores represent better functioning. Patients who reached the MCID differed from patients who did not reach the MCID with respect to baseline PROM scores across the evaluated PROMs and for both HA and KA. Patients who reached an MCID versus those who did not also differed regarding other aspects including education and comorbidities, but this was not consistent across PROMs and arthroplasty type. Preoperative PROM score thresholds for HA were 0.7 for EQ-5D-5L (Youden index: 0.55), 42 for HOOS-PS (Youden index: 0.27), and 3.5 for the pain scale (Youden index: 0.47). For KA, the thresholds were 0.6 for EQ-5D-5L (Youden index: 0.57), 39 for KOOS-PS (Youden index: 0.25), and 6.5 for the pain scale (Youden index: 0.40). A higher Youden index for EQ-5D-5L than for the other PROMs indicates that the thresholds for EQ-5D-5L were better for distinguishing patients who reached a meaningful improvement from those who did not. Patients who did not reach the thresholds could still achieve MCIDs, especially for functionality and the pain scale.

CONCLUSION

We found that patients who experienced meaningful improvements (MCIDs) mainly differed from those who did not regarding their preoperative PROM scores. We further identified that patients undergoing HA or KA with a score above 0.7 or 0.6, respectively, on the EQ-5D-5L, below 42 or 39 on the HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS, or below 3.5 or 6.5 on a 10-point joint-specific pain scale presurgery had no meaningful benefit from surgery. The thresholds can support clinical decision-making. For example, when thresholds indicate that a meaningful improvement is not likely to be achieved after surgery, other treatment options may be prioritized. Although the thresholds can be used as support, patient preferences and medical expertise must supplement the decision. Future studies might evaluate the utility of using these thresholds in practice, examine how different thresholds can be combined as a multidimensional decision tool, and derive presurgery thresholds based on additional PROMs used in practice.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Preoperative PROM score thresholds in this study will support clinicians in decision-making through objective measures that can improve the quality of the recommendation for surgery.

Postoperative Benefits of Soft Tissue Wrist Arthroscopy: Retro- and Prospective Analyses of Outcome Measures

Background: Elective soft-tissue-only wrist arthroscopy is a standard procedure in hand surgery for the diagnosis and treatment of wrist pain. A number of pathologies can be treated arthroscopically, with the aim of pain reduction and improved wrist mobility. A postinterventional evaluation of the treatment using objective and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) allows for an evidence-based statement about the benefits of soft-tissue-only wrist arthroscopy. Methods: A dual-center study combining retro- and prospective clinical analyses of patient outcomes after soft-tissue-only wrist arthroscopies was performed. The data were collected at two hospitals with departments specializing in hand surgery. The outcome was measured by assessing the range of motion of the wrist and its manual strength, as well as PROMs, including Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores. Results: A total of 154 soft interventions met the study criteria and could be included. Seven months after the elective soft-tissue-only wrist arthroscopies, mobility improved significantly for active extension and flexion, as well as the ulnar and radial abduction of the wrist. The grip strength also improved significantly, by an average of 6 kg, during this period. The DASH score improved significantly, from 35 points to 14 points. Additionally, wrist pain at rest was reduced significantly. Conclusions: After elective soft-tissue-only wrist arthroscopy, patients showed an overall functional improvement in their wrist, with a significant reduction in pain and improvement of mobility and grip strength. This study emphasizes the importance of wrist arthroscopy as a successful treatment option for soft tissue pathologies of the wrist.

Clinically Significant Outcome Scores in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Shoulder and Knee Surgery Are Increasing in Prevalence but Often Reported Incorrectly

PURPOSE

To study the prevalence and quality of application of minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), and maximum outcome improvement (MOI), reported in the orthopaedic sports medicine knee and shoulder literature in recent years and to bring awareness of proper use of such metrics.

METHODS

A literature review of all shoulder and knee articles published from the American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES), and Arthroscopy from 2016 to 2020 was performed, specifically investigating whether MCID, SCB, PASS, or MOI were used or reported. Additionally, the way these metrics were reported and interpreted was recorded.

RESULTS

Out of 5,039 studies, 889 shoulder and knee studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 16.7% reported either MCID, PASS, or SCB. MCID was the most reported across all 3 journals. MCID was reported 12.4% of the time throughout the 5 years. PASS was reported 3.2% and SCB 1.1% of the time over the 5 years. MOI was not reported by any of the journals during this period. There was a statistically significant increase in MCID reporting in 2 of the 3 journals over the 5-year course, Arthroscopy (P = .02) and AJSM (P = .05). There was no statistically significant increase in PASS or SCB reporting rates in all 3 journals. Only 39.1% of studies reported MCID correctly (i.e., defined as the number of individual patients meeting MCID/total patients in the study).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows an increasing trend in the use of clinically significant outcome metrics, such as MCID, for interpretation of patient-reported outcomes; however, these individual metrics are often not being used on the individual level and subsequently not reported accurately. We recommend determining whether the specific metric met the threshold per individual patient and then reporting those as a percentage of the sample population to achieve the full potential of these metrics and translate them accurately across various studies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

As the usage of clinically significant outcome metrics rises, so does the need for accurate reporting. These findings will encourage future studies to follow a more standardized format.

Patient-reported outcome measures in hip fracture patients

Aims

The aims of this study were to assess quality of life after hip fractures, to characterize respondents to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and to describe the recovery trajectory of hip fracture patients.

Methods

Data on 35,206 hip fractures (2014 to 2018; 67.2% female) in the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register were linked to data from the Norwegian Patient Registry and Statistics Norway. PROMs data were collected using the EuroQol five-dimension three-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) scoring instrument and living patients were invited to respond at four, 12, and 36 months post fracture. Multiple imputation procedures were performed as a model to substitute missing PROM data. Differences in response rates between categories of covariates were analyzed using chi-squared test statistics. The association between patient and socioeconomic characteristics and the reported EQ-5D-3L scores was analyzed using linear regression.

Results

The median age was 83 years (interquartile range 76 to 90), and 3,561 (10%) lived in a healthcare facility. Observed mean pre-fracture EQ-5D-3L index score was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.803 to 0.810), which decreased to 0.66 at four months, to 0.70 at 12 months, and to 0.73 at 36 months. In the imputed datasets, the reduction from pre-fracture was similar (0.15 points) but an improvement up to 36 months was modest (0.01 to 0.03 points). Patients with higher age, male sex, severe comorbidity, cognitive impairment, lower income, lower education, and those in residential care facilities had a lower proportion of respondents, and systematically reported a lower health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The response pattern of patients influenced scores significantly, and the highest scores are found in patients reporting scores at all observation times.

Conclusion

Hip fracture leads to a persistent reduction in measured HRQoL, up to 36 months. The patients' health and socioeconomic status were associated with the proportion of patients returning PROM data for analysis, and affected the results reported. Observed EQ-5D-3L scores are affected by attrition and selection bias mechanisms and motivate the use of statistical modelling for adjustment.

Orthopaedic Hand Patient Support Systems Have Valuable Insight to Patient Function and Pain

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) are increasingly used in clinical assessment. Research on how patient support systems contribute to physician understanding of patient condition is limited. Thus, insights from significant others may provide value, especially when concerns exist regarding patient response validity. Patients recruited from the pre-operative environment undergoing orthopaedic hand procedures responded to PROMIS-Pain Interference (PI), PROMIS-Upper Extremity (UE), PROMIS-Depression (D), and QuickDASH. They then selected a significant other (SO) to do the same. Patients and SOs were also asked to complete the West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI) as a measure of support-related responses. Patient and SO responses were compared, and support-related responses were added in subsequent analyses to examine their effect on SO PRO assessment.

Validation of the Parisian Hamstring Avulsion Score (PHAS) in the Evaluation and Follow-up of Patients Operated for Proximal Hamstring Avulsion

BACKGROUND

No validated score is available for the prediction of return to sport (RTS) after proximal hamstring avulsion (PHA) surgery.

PURPOSE

To validate a new assessment tool for patients after PHA surgery: the Parisian Hamstring Avulsion Score (PHAS).

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

All patients at our clinic who had surgery for PHA between January 2015 and March 2018 were included in this study. A suspected clinical diagnosis of PHA was confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging. PHA was repaired by surgical reinsertion with suture anchors. Minimum postoperative follow-up was 2 years, and the PHAS, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), score, and Tegner score were used. The PHAS is a patient-reported outcome measure, evaluating the effect of PHA injury with 9 items. It was validated by calculating its psychometric properties, and then correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationship between the PHAS, UCLA score, and Tegner score. Cutoff values for the prediction of RTS were determined.

RESULTS

A prospective case series study was performed. A total of 156 patients were included. Median age (first quartile; third quartile) was 54.2 years (44.7 years; 61.3 years), and the mean ± SD time of the final follow-up was 69 ± 11.6 months. Two years after surgery, 66.7% (n = 104) of patients were able to RTS. A strong correlation was noted between all 3 scores at 1 year postoperatively. Overall internal consistency was high, with a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.86. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.96, showing excellent reliability. The minimal detectable change was 12.9. No patients reached the maximum score at 2 years. Analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curves of the 3 scores at postoperative 9 months in relation to the RTS at 1 and 2 years showed area under the curve values of >0.7, indicating significant discriminant capacity for the RTS. A PHAS cutoff value of 86 at 9 months for the prediction of RTS at postoperative 1 year had a sensitivity of 65.6% (95% CI, 53.7%-77.5%) and a specificity of 81.4% (95% CI, 69.8%-93%).

CONCLUSION

PHAS is a valid and reliable tool for follow-up after PHA surgery. It also offers a simple way to predict RTS.

Variability of MCID, SCB, and PASS Thresholds in Studies Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

An increasing reliance on patient-reported outcomes has led to greater emphasis on minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds in assessing rotator cuff repairs.

PURPOSE

To review the MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds reported for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after rotator cuff repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases were queried for full-text journal articles in English published between January 1, 2000, and May 31, 2022. Studies with MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds reported for patients with rotator cuff repair and a minimum of 12 months of follow-up were included. Reported MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds and associated calculation methods were extracted.

RESULTS

There were 41 unique studies (6331 shoulders) that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37 (90%) reported MCID; 16 (39%), PASS; and 11 (27%), SCB values. The most common PROMs were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and the Constant-Murley score. In total, 71% (29/41) of these studies referenced values in the literature, usually studies of patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (21/29). Twelve studies calculated MCID, SCB, or PASS thresholds using anchor-based approaches, whereas 6 studies also calculated thresholds using distribution-based methods. The use of MCID, SCB, and PASS in the rotator cuff repair literature is increasing, with half of the included studies published within the final 17 months of the studied period.

CONCLUSION

Significant variability was seen in the reporting of MCID, SCB, and PASS threshold values after rotator cuff repair. Researchers should prioritize studies that report clinical outcome thresholds calculated using anchor-based methods and should critically review both the anchor question and its response choices. Standardization of MCID, SCB, and PASS values and calculation methods will allow for a more reliable assessment of PROMs in rotator cuff repair moving forward.

No clinically significant differences in patient-reported outcome measures across total hip arthroplasty approaches

INTRODUCTION

As recent studies demonstrate an ongoing debate surrounding outcomes and complications with respect to different total hip arthroplasty (THA) approaches, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may provide valuable information for clinician and patient decision-making. Therefore, our systematic review aimed to assess how surgical approach influences patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

5 online databases were queried for all studies published between January 1, 1997 and March 4, 2022 that reported on PROMs across various surgical approaches to THA. Studies reporting on PROMs in primary THA patients segregated by surgical approach were included. Articles reporting on revision THA, hip resurfacing, and arthroscopy were excluded. Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models were utilised to calculate the pooled mean difference (MDs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs).

RESULTS

No differences between the DAA and other approaches were observed when evaluating HOOS (MD -0.28; 95% CI, -1.98-1.41; p = 0.74), HHS (MD 2.38; 95% CI, -0.27-5.03; p = 0.08), OHS (MD 1.35; 95% CI, -2.00-4.71; p = 0.43), FJS-12 (MD 5.88; 95% CI, -0.36-12.12; p = 0.06), VAS-pain (MD -0.32; 95% CI, -0.68-0.04; p = 0.08), and WOMAC-pain (MD -0.73; 95% CI, -3.85-2.39; p = 0.65) scores. WOMAC (MD 2.47; 95% CI, 0.54-4.40; p = 0.01) and EQ-5D Index (MD 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.06; p = 0.002) scores were found to significantly favour the DAA cohort over the other approaches. Only the EQ-5D index score remained significant following sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Superiority of any 1 approach could not be concluded based on the mixed findings of the present analysis. Although our pooled analysis found no significant differences in outcomes except for those measured by the EQ-5D index, a few additional metrics, notably the WOMAC, HHS, FJS-12, and VAS-pain scores, leaned in favour of the DAA.

A comparative analysis of suture-augmented and standard hamstring autograft single-bundle ACL reconstruction outcomes: short-term functional benefits without long-term impact

BACKGROUND

Augmentation of the biologic graft with nonabsorbable suture material during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a relatively new technique to enhance its biomechanical properties and add additional support to the critical process of healing. We aimed to compare the short-term functional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complication rates of patients treated with either standard single-bundle four-strand hamstring ACLR or added suture augmentation (SA).

METHODS

Patients undergoing arthroscopic ACLR between February 2015-January 2017 and in the standard ACLR group, and between February 2017-September 2019 in the SA-ACLR group operated by adding a no.5 FiberWire® (Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA) braided suture to the hamstring autograft, were retrospectively reviewed and the PROMs were compared. Patients were followed up for a 24-month period and PROMs were assessed by the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form and Tegner-Lysholm knee score. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, and postoperative complications including graft retear requiring revision surgery, deep vein thrombois, and surgical site infection were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

We included 79 patients with mean age of 31.6 ± 8.3 years in the standard ACLR group, and 90 patients with mean oge of 30.5 ± 7.6 in the SA-ACLR group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, sex, body mass index, and medical comorbidities. The values of the IKDC scores increased to 75.8 ± 18.9 in the standard ACLR group, and 85.6 ± 12.6 in the SA-ACLR group, 24 months after the operation (P < 0.05). The 24-month postoperative Tegner-Lysholm scores escalated to 79.3 ± 21.0 in the standard ACLR group and 91.0 ± 13.7 in the SA-ACLR group (P < 0.05). Four (5.1%) patients in the standard ACLR group and 4 (4.4%) in the SA-ACLR group experienced graft retear requiring revision surgery (P > 0.05). Incidence of surgical site infection and deep vein thrombosis showed no significant differences between the two groups, 24 months after ACLR.

CONCLUSION

SA-ACLR is associated with improved short-term functional PROMs compared to the standard hamstring ACLR. Although SA did not reduce the retear rate, and infection and DVT rates did not differ between study groups, superior improvement of PROMs in SA approach, leverages this method for ACLR.

The Significance of Selecting an Appropriate Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM): A Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Specific Paediatric International Documentation Committee Subjective (Pedi-IKDC) Knee Form

INTRODUCTION

The selection of an appropriate PROM is a crucial aspect in assessing outcomes. Questionnaires that have not been designed or validated for a paediatric population are routinely used. Using a questionnaire requires translation, cultural adaptation, and testing the psychometric properties of the translated questionnaire. There is no applicable questionnaire in our country for children with knee-specific conditions in sports orthopaedics. Therefore, this study aims to translate, culturally adapt, and assess the psychometric properties of the Paediatric IKDC (Pedi-IKDC) questionnaire within the Lithuanian paediatric population.

METHODS

The translation was conducted in accordance with international standards. Patients aged 11-17 years with various knee disorders participated in three surveys and completed the Pedi-IKDC, Lysholm, and PedsQL questionnaires. Interviews with patients following the translation process, in addition to floor and ceiling effects, were used to assess content validity. Cronbach alpha (α) statistics and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were applied to measure internal consistency and reproducibility, respectively. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and smallest detectable change (SDC) were calculated to assess reliability. Pearson correlations were calculated between Pedi-IKDC and Lysholm PedsQL scores to determine criteria validity. The effect size (ES) and standardised response mean (SRM) were calculated to assess the responsiveness to change.

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha (α) was 0.91 for the total score, 0.75 for symptoms, and 0.92 for the sport/function component. The ICC for overall scores was 0.98, with each question ranging from 0.87 to 0.98. The SEM was 2.97, and the SDC was 8.23. Lysholm and PedsQL physical functioning domain scores had moderate correlations (0.8 > r > 0.5), and the overall PedsQL score had a weak correlation (0.5 > r > 0.2) to the Pedi-IKDC score. The floor and ceiling effects were 3.3% and 1.6%, respectively. The SRM was 1.72 and the ES was 1.98.

CONCLUSIONS

The Lithuanian Pedi-IKDC version is an appropriate evaluation instrument for assessing outcomes in children with knee disorders. All of the psychometric features produced acceptable results.

Correlation between Harris hip score and gait analysis through artificial intelligence pose estimation in patients after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Recently, open pose estimation using artificial intelligence (AI) has enabled the analysis of time series of human movements through digital video inputs. Analyzing a person's actual movement as a digitized image would give objectivity in evaluating a person's physical function. In the present study, we investigated the relationship of AI camera-based open pose estimation with Harris Hip Score (HHS) developed for patient-reported outcome (PRO) of hip joint function.

METHOD

HHS evaluation and pose estimation using AI camera were performed for a total of 56 patients after total hip arthroplasty in Gyeongsang National University Hospital. Joint angles and gait parameters were analyzed by extracting joint points from time-series data of the patient's movements. A total of 65 parameters were from raw data of the lower extremity. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to find main parameters. K-means cluster, X-squared test, Random forest, and mean decrease Gini (MDG) graph were also applied.

RESULTS

The train model showed 75% prediction accuracy and the test model showed 81.8% reality prediction accuracy in Random forest. "Anklerang_max", "kneeankle_diff", and "anklerang_rl" showed the top 3 Gini importance score in the Mean Decrease Gini (MDG) graph.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that pose estimation data using AI camera is related to HHS by presenting associated gait parameters. In addition, our results suggest that ankle angle associated parameters could be key factors of gait analysis in patients who undergo total hip arthroplasty.

Development and validation of a French-language cross-cultural adaptation of the Pedi-IKDC Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

The Pedi-IKDC is an English-language, knee-specific, paediatric questionnaire used by orthopaedic surgeons around the world as a valuable patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). The objective of this study was thus to extend the applicability of the Pedi-IKDC to French-speaking Canadian patients, for both clinical practice and research, by developing a French-language cross-cultural adaptation of the original version.

HYPOTHESIS

The French adaptation of the Pedi-IKDC is valid and reliable for evaluating French-speaking children with knee conditions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Pedi-IKDC was translated to French by a panel of orthopaedic surgeons then back-translated by a professional translator. The original English version and the back-translation were compared to assess their similarity and confirm the faithfulness of the French translation. The validity of the French version was then tested at a major paediatric hospital in French-speaking Canada, in 203 children, including 163 with knee pain and 40 without knee symptoms. Internal consistency, construct validity, and discriminant capacity of the French version were assessed.

RESULTS

Internal consistency of the Pedi-IKDC adaptation was excellent (Cronbach's alpha, 0.934 in the knee-pain group). Construct validity was robust, with all nine hypotheses adapted from the original Pedi-IKDC article demonstrating strong (n=7) or moderate (n=2) correlations (p<0.001). The evaluation of discriminant capacity identified no statistically significant score differences according to most of the respondent characteristics (body mass index, age group, type of diagnosis, and type of treatment). However, scores differed significantly between females and males.

DISCUSSION

The French-language cross-cultural adaptation of the Pedi-IKDC obtained using a universally recognized method for translating PROMs demonstrated good performance, with psychometric properties similar to those of the original Pedi-IKDC and of its Danish, Italian, and Russian adaptations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Young or Old Age and Non-White Race Are Associated With Poor Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Response Compliance After Orthopaedic Surgery

Purpose

To investigate orthopaedic patient compliance with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and identify factors that improve response rates.

Methods

Our search strategy comprised a combination of key words and database-specific subject headings for the concepts of orthopaedic surgical procedures, compliance, and PROMs from several research databases from inception to October 11, 2022. Duplicates were removed. A total of 97 studies were included. A table was created for the remaining articles to be appraised and analyzed. The collected data included study characteristics, follow-up/compliance rate, factors that increase/decrease compliance, and type of PROM. Follow-up/compliance rate was determined to be any reported response rate. The range and average used for analysis was based on the highest or lowest number reported in the specific article.

Results

The range of compliance reported was 11.3% to 100%. The overall response rate was 68.6%. The average baseline (preoperative/previsit) response rate was 76.6%. Most studies (77%) had greater than 50% compliance. Intervention/reminder of any type (most commonly phone call or mail) resulted in improved compliance from 44.6% to 70.6%. Young and elderly non-White male patients had the lowest compliance rate. When directly compared, phone call (71.5%) resulted in a greater compliance rate than electronic-based (53.2%) or paper-based (57.6%) surveys.

Conclusions

The response rates for PROMs vary across the orthopaedic literature. Patient-specific factors, such as age (young or old) and race (non-White), may contribute to poor PROM response rate. Reminders and interventions significantly improve PROM response rates.

Clinical Relevance

PROMs are important tools in many aspects of medicine. The data generated from these tools not only provide information about individual patient outcomes but also make hypothesis-driven comparisons possible. Understanding the factors that affect patient compliance with PROMs is vital to our accurate understanding of patient outcomes and the overall advancement of medical care.

Pearls and pitfalls of PROMIS clinically significant outcomes in orthopaedic surgery

INTRODUCTION

Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed as a uniform and generalizable PROM system using item response theory and computer adaptive testing. We aimed to assess the utilization of PROMIS for clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) measurements and provide insights into its use in orthopaedic research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed PROMIS CSO reports for orthopaedic procedures via PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science from inception to 2022, excluding abstracts and missing measurements. Bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and questionnaire compliance. PROMIS domains, CSO measures, and study populations were described. A meta-analysis compared distribution and anchor-based MCIDs in low-bias (NOS ≥ 7) studies.

RESULTS

Overall, 54 publications from 2016 to 2022 were reviewed. PROMIS CSO studies were observational with increasing publication rates. Evidence-level was II in 10/54, bias low in 51/54, and compliance ≥ 86% in 46/54. Most (28/54) analysed lower extremity procedures. PROMIS domains examined Pain Function (PF) in 44/54, Pain Interference (PI) in 36/54, and Depression (D) in 18/54. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was reported in 51/54 and calculated based on distribution in 39/51 and anchor in 29/51. Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and minimal detectable change (MDC) were reported in ≤ 10/54. MCIDs were not significantly greater than MDCs. Anchor-based MCIDs were greater than distribution based MCIDs (standardized mean difference = 0.44, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS CSOs are increasingly utilized, especially for lower extremity procedures assessing the PF, PI, and D domains using distribution-based MCID. Using more conservative anchor-based MCIDs and reporting MDCs may strengthen results. Researchers should consider unique pearls and pitfalls when assessing PROMIS CSOs.

Operationalizing PROMs at the Musculoskeletal Practice and Policy Levels

There continues to be growing interest in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), especially as value-based healthcare initiatives gain more traction. Although it is well-established that PROMs can be useful in clinical research, how to operationalize PROMs in clinical care and policy initiatives remains a "work in progress." Following the design of a comprehensive PROM administration and routine collection system, orthopaedic surgeons and their patients can reap the benefits of PROMs in practice through improved shared clinical decision-making discussions at the individual patient level and closer symptom monitoring on a large scale, with improved resource allocation at the population health level. Although certain government and payer incentives exist to collect PROMs at present, it is reasonable to assume that future policy initiatives will begin to use the actual PROM scores to assess clinical outcomes. Orthopaedic surgeons with interest in this area should prioritize their involvement in policy discussion to ensure PROMs are being used appropriately in novel payment models and policy endeavors so that they are both evaluated and compensated fairly. Specifically, orthopaedic surgeons can help ensure appropriate risk adjustment of patients when this is being done. Undoubtedly, PROMs will only become a larger part of musculoskeletal care moving forward.

The Impact of Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgical Approach on Short-Term Postoperative and Patient-Reported Outcomes

Background While multiple studies have compared outcomes between the direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterolateral (PL) total hip arthroplasty (THA), the debate over the optimal approach remains. Proponents of the DAA suggest that its muscle-sparing properties and unrestricted rehabilitation facilitate a more rapid return to function. The majority of studies demonstrate that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are similar between approaches beyond the one-year timeframe, but results are mixed when evaluating earlier time points. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and PROs between DAA and PL THAs at six weeks postoperatively. Methods A retrospective review of 749 primary THAs (151 PL, 598 DAA) from March 2020 to November 2022 was performed. All surgeries were performed by one of the five board-certified and fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons. All patients completed Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) questionnaires preoperatively and at six weeks postoperatively. A univariate comparison of clinical outcomes (length of stay (LOS), home discharge rate, 90-day ED returns, and readmissions) and six-week PROMIS-PF scores between approaches was performed. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of the approach on outcomes after adjusting for baseline differences between groups. Results Patients undergoing DAA THA experienced significantly shorter average LOS (0.71 vs. 1.36 days, p<0.001), higher rates of home discharge (99.0 vs. 92.1%, p<0.001), and lower rates of 90-day readmissions (0.7 vs. 6.0%, p<0.001) than those undergoing the PL approach. At six weeks postoperatively, DAA patients achieved higher average PROMIS-PF scores (42.2 vs. 39.9, p=0.001). After adjusting for the Charlson Comorbidity Index and baseline physical function, the DAA was significantly associated with shorter LOS (β=-0.52, p<0.001), increased odds of home discharge (OR=5.70, p=0.001), reduced risk of 90-day readmission (OR=0.14, p=0.001), and higher PROMIS-PF scores at six weeks postoperatively (β=1.37, p=0.045). Conclusion In comparison to patients undergoing PL THA, those treated using the DAA experienced improved clinical and PROs over the six-week postoperative period. While both approaches resulted in satisfactory outcomes, these results support the assertion that DAA THA may result in more rapid recovery and return to function.

Arthroscopic Meniscectomy vs Meniscal Repair: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes

Background Meniscal tears are the most common injury of the knee. Surgical treatment has fallen into contention recently and includes arthroscopic meniscectomy and meniscal repair. The primary aim of this study was to quantitatively evaluate patients with isolated meniscal tears and compare their outcomes with patients who have undergone arthroscopic meniscus surgery. The secondary aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients who have undergone arthroscopic meniscectomy with patients who have undergone arthroscopic meniscal repair. Methods This comparative clinical study screened 334 patients to identify subjects who underwent arthroscopic knee surgery for isolated meniscal tears and compare them to patients with symptomatic isolated meniscal tears awaiting surgery using validated patient-reported outcome measures. These included the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form, Lysholm score, Tegner score, EuroQol-5 Dimension, and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey. Results A total of 117 patients (Meniscal Tear group (n=36), Meniscectomy group (n=64), and Meniscal Repair group (n=17)) were included in the final data analysis. Both the Meniscectomy group and the Meniscal Repair group (mean 55-month follow-up) showed significantly better clinical outcomes than patients in the Meniscal Tear group (p<0.05). Overall, the Meniscal Repair group demonstrated superior clinical outcomes when compared to the Meniscectomy group (p<0.05). Conclusion Arthroscopic knee surgery showed significant clinical benefit at medium-term follow-up in treating patients with isolated meniscal tears. When feasible, meniscal repair should be performed preferentially over meniscectomy.

Review of the Most Cited Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) Studies Published in the Neurospine Surgical Literature

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated tools that are widely utilized in research and patient care. Their diversity, quality, and application remain matters of peak research interest. This article is a review of the PROMs that were utilized in high-impact publications in the neurospine surgical literature. The 50 most cited articles on the subject were selected and analysed. Most (42 articles) were published in spine journals and, in particular, in the journal Spine (Phila Pa 1976) (28 articles). A total of 34 PROMs were utilized, of which 24 were used only once in single studies. The four most common PROMs were Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) (15 articles), Short Form-12 and Short Form-36 (SF-12 and SF-36) (11 articles), Ronald-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) (nine articles), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (five articles). Nineteen articles focused on validating translated versions of 11 PROMs to other languages. The languages that had the maximal number of tools translated to amongst the highly cited articles were Italian (six tools), Portuguese (four tools), German (three tools), and Japanese (three tools). The most common diagnoses and the PROMs used for them were back pain and cervical spine disorder (SF-12 and SF-36 (nine articles), RMDQ (eight articles), and ODI (five articles)), and idiopathic scoliosis (SRS-22) (14 articles)). The median (range) article citation number was 137 (78-675). The four most cited PROMs were SRS-22 (2,869), SF-12 and SF-36 (2,558), RMDQ (1,456), and ODI (852). Citation numbers were positively impacted by article age and participant number but not by tool type or clinical diagnosis. In conclusion, a wide range of PROMs was utilized in the 50 most cited publications in the neurospine surgical literature. The majority were disease-specific rather than generic and targeted particular spine pathology. Neurosurgical PROMs were under-represented amongst the most cited articles. Awareness of the PROMs used in high-impact studies may be helpful in tool selection in future research. PROMs are valuable in standardizing subjective outcomes. Their use in research and clinical settings in any validated language is highly encouraged.

The Effects of Sociodemographic Factors on Baseline Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients with Foot and Ankle Conditions

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic care disparities persist within orthopaedics in the United States. This study aimed to deepen our understanding of which sociodemographic factors most impact patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) score variation and may explain racial and ethnic disparities in PROM scores.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed baseline PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) Global-Physical (PGP) and PROMIS Global-Mental (PGM) scores of 23,171 foot and ankle patients who completed the instrument from 2016 to 2021. A series of regression models was used to evaluate scores by race and ethnicity after adjusting in a stepwise fashion for household income, education level, primary language, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), sex, and age. Full models were utilized to compare independent effects of predictors.

RESULTS

For the PGP and PGM, adjusting for income, education level, and CCI reduced racial disparity by 61% and 54%, respectively, and adjusting for education level, language, and income reduced ethnic disparity by 67% and 65%, respectively. Full models revealed that an education level of high school or less and a severe CCI had the largest negative effects on scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Education level, primary language, income, and CCI explained the majority (but not all) of the racial and ethnic disparities in our cohort. Among the explored factors, education level and CCI were predominant drivers of PROM score variation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patient preferences as human factors for health data recommender systems and shared decision making in orthopaedic practice

Background

A core set of requirements for designing AI-based Health Recommender Systems (HRS) is a thorough understanding of human factors in a decision-making process. Patient preferences regarding treatment outcomes can be one important human factor. For orthopaedic medicine, limited communication may occur between a patient and a provider during the short duration of a clinical visit, limiting the opportunity for the patient to express treatment outcome preferences (TOP). This may occur despite patient preferences having a significant impact on achieving patient satisfaction, shared decision making and treatment success. Inclusion of patient preferences during patient intake and/or during the early phases of patient contact and information gathering can lead to better treatment recommendations.

Aim

We aim to explore patient treatment outcome preferences as significant human factors in treatment decision making in orthopedics. The goal of this research is to design, build, and test an app that collects baseline TOPs across orthopaedic outcomes and reports this information to providers during a clinical visit. This data may also be used to inform the design of HRSs for orthopaedic treatment decision making.

Methods

We created a mobile app to collect TOPs using a direct weighting (DW) technique. We used a mixed methods approach to pilot test the app with 23 first-time orthopaedic visit patients presenting with joint pain and/or function deficiency by presenting the app for utilization and conducting qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys post utilization.

Results

The study validated five core TOP domains, with most users dividing their 100-point DW allocation across 1-3 domains. The tool received moderate to high usability scores. Thematic analysis of patient interviews provides insights into TOPs that are important to patients, how they can be communicated effectively, and incorporated into a clinical visit with meaningful patient-provider communication that leads to shared decision making.

Conclusion

Patient TOPs may be important human factors to consider in determining treatment options that may be helpful for automating patient treatment recommendations. We conclude that inclusion of patient TOPs to inform the design of HRSs results in creating more robust patient treatment profiles in the EHR thus enhancing opportunities for treatment recommendations and future AI applications.

Illicit drug and alcohol use and measures of musculoskeletal function and mental health in orthopaedic trauma patients

Objectives

The objective of this study was to describe the relationship between positive toxicology screens and measures of preinjury mental health and physical function in an orthopaedic trauma population.

Design

This was a cross-sectional study.

Setting

Urban Level 1 trauma center.

Patients

A total of 125 trauma patients gave written consent for this study.

Main Outcome Measurements

Questionnaires such as, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, General Anxiety Disorder-7, PCL-5, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment, were used to survey patients after surgical intervention.

Results

Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (P = 0.05) and PCL-5 (P = 0.04) were not found to have significant differences between positive and negative toxicology screens. Both General Anxiety Disorder-7 (P = 0.004) and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment function (P = 0.006) were significantly higher in patients with positive toxicology screens.

Conclusions

Positive toxicology seems to be associated with preinjury anxiety. Patient reported preinjury function was not adversely affected by the presence of illicit substances or alcohol, nor were levels of post-traumatic stress disorder and depression found to be higher in patients with positive toxicology screens.

Level of Evidence

Level IV Cross-Sectional Study.

Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms Correlated to Patient-Reported Outcome Measures after Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Study in the Perioperative Period

Anxiety and depressive symptoms adversely affect surgical outcomes in patients with rotator cuff tear (RCT) undergoing surgical repair. Patients without a diagnosis of mood disorders, such as anxiety and depression, before rotator cuff repair (RCR) can be considered an optimal candidate for surgery. The objective of this prospective observational study was to evaluate the relationship between anxiety and depressive symptoms, using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) as an assessment tool, and patient-reported outcome measures in RCT after repair surgery. This study included patients with RCT undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR). Forty-three patients were included who had completed the HADS, Constant Murley Score (CMS), and Short Form Health Survey 36 (SF-36) questionnaires before surgery and in the postoperative follow-up, at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. The Friedman test showed that there were statistically significant changes in the different times point for HADS (p < 0.001), anxiety subscale of HADS, i.e., HADS-A (p < 0.001), depression subscale of HADS, i.e., HADS-D (p < 0.001), CMS (p < 0.001), and SF-36 (p < 0.001). The average scores of HADS, HADS-A, and HADS-D improved at each follow-up, showing improvement in discomfort. From the third month after surgery, there was an improvement in anxiety and depression disorders related to improved quality of life, functionality, and pain perception. The trend remained stable until the sixth month of follow up. This study shows that anxiety and depressive symptoms in RCT patients are significantly reduced after RCR with subsequent important improvements in terms of functionality, ability to carry out activities of daily living, perceived pain, and quality of life.

Do we still need to screen our patients?-Orthopaedic scoring based on motion tracking

PURPOSE

Orthopaedic scores are essential for the clinical assessment of movement disorders but require an experienced clinician for the manual scoring. Wearable systems are taking root in the medical field and offer a possibility for the convenient collection of motion tracking data. The purpose of this work is to demonstrate the feasibility of automated orthopaedic scorings based on motion tracking data using the Harris Hip Score and the Knee Society Score as examples.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients received a clinical examination and an instrumental gait analysis after hip or knee arthroplasty. Seven hundred forty-four gait features were extracted from each patient's representative gait cycle. For each score, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted with a subsequent tenfold cross-validation. A data split of 70%/30% was applied for training/testing.

RESULTS

Both scores can be reproduced with excellent coefficients of determination R2 for training, testing and cross-validation by applying regression models based on four to six features from instrumental gait analysis as well as the patient-reported parameter 'pain' as an offset factor.

CONCLUSION

Computing established orthopaedic scores based on motion tracking data yields an automated evaluation of a joint function at the hip and knee which is suitable for direct clinical interpretation. In combination with novel technologies for wearable data collection, these computations can support healthcare staff with objective and telemedical applicable scorings for a large number of patients without the need for trained clinicians.

Do web-based follow-up surveys have a better response rate than traditional paper-based questionnaires following outpatient arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Considering the extensive use of smartphones in current societies, web-based applications could be considered as a new option for patient follow-up in surgery. By means of such tool, automated and periodic questionnaires could improve the rigor, accuracy and the comprehensiveness of postoperative monitoring, as well as early detection of complications, especially in the current context of evolving ambulatory surgery.

HYPOTHESIS

The web-based surveys would improve the quality of immediate postoperative monitoring.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

For 7 months, we included all patients who underwent outpatient arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. After preoperative randomization, each patient was asked postoperatively to complete either paper-based forms or digital questionnaires via a website (Orthense.com®, Digikare Inc. Blagnac, France). Both media (i.e. paper and digital) followed the same postoperative agenda (i.e., D+3, D+14, D+28, D+45, D+90) and had the same content, including pain and discomfort assessments, functional scores (i.e. Shoulder subjective value, simple shoulder test and auto-constant scores). The main objective was to investigate the quality of postoperative follow-up after outpatient arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery, using either printed questionnaires or web-based surveys. The hypothesis was that using a web-based survey would result in greater response rates and increased patient satisfaction regarding follow-up. Primary outcomes were questionnaire response rates at D+45 and D+90, while secondary outcomes were overall response rates, patient recommendation for the monitoring medium and overall patient satisfaction regarding their follow-up using the net promoter score (NPS).

RESULTS

Among the 59 consecutive patients who were included, there were 27 females and 26 males with a mean age of 57±10.2 years; 27 patients completed the web-based survey (Group A) and 26 patients answered paper-based questionnaires (Group B). Regarding the D+45 questionnaire, response rates were 85.2% (n=23) in group A and 42.3% (n=11) in group B (p=.005); a similar significant difference was observed regarding the D+90 questionnaire, with response rates of 70.4% and 34.6%, respectively (p=.027). The mean NPS for the survey was 10 in Group A and 8.29 in Group B (p=.016). Overall, satisfaction regarding postoperative care did not differ between the two groups.

DISCUSSION

Compared to traditional paper-based forms, web-based surveys appear to increase patient adherence to short-term postoperative monitoring. If these findings were to be confirmed in long-term follow-up, such straightforward and cost-effective tool could be of great use in clinical care and research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I; Randomized controlled clinical trial.

Do Patients Accurately Recall Their Preoperative Symptoms After Elective Orthopedic Procedures?

Patient-reported outcome measures are a frequent tool used to assess orthopedic surgical outcomes. However, recall bias is a potential limitation of these tools when used retrospectively, as they rely on patients to accurately recall their preoperative symptoms. A database search of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline Ovid, and Scopus until May 2021 was completed in duplicate by two reviewers. Studies considered eligible for inclusion were those which reported on patient recall bias associated with orthopedic surgery. The primary outcome of interest investigated was the accuracy of patient recollection of preoperative health status. Any factors that were identified as affecting patient recall were secondary outcomes of interest. Of the 4,065 studies initially screened, 20 studies with 3,454 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, there were 2,371 (69%) knee and hip patients, 422 (12%) shoulder patients, 370 (11%) spine patients, 208 (6%) other upper extremity patients, and 83 (2%) foot and ankle patients. Out of the eight studies that evaluated patient recall within three months postoperatively, seven studies concluded that patient recall is accurate. Out of the 13 studies that evaluated patient recall beyond three months postoperatively, nine studies concluded that patient recall is inaccurate. The accuracy of patient recall of preoperative symptoms after elective orthopedic procedures is not reliable beyond three months postoperatively.

An Exploratory Factor Analysis of the National Institutes of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation in Knee Surgery Patients

INTRODUCTION

Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) have been suggested for use in measuring treatment effectiveness. To minimize patient burden, two approaches have been proposed: An orthopedic-specific Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) or computer adaptive testing methods such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). The goal of this work was to examine the constructs measured by the SANE and PROMIS system in a military orthopedic population undergoing knee surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 732 patients and 2,166 complete observations, the SANE-Knee PRO and PROMIS surveys for Depression, Anxiety, Pain Interference, Sleep Disturbance, and Physical Function were obtained. A correlation matrix between the PROs was calculated, the number of latent factors to extract was determined via parallel plot, and the final principal axis exploratory factor analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The parallel plot analysis indicated that two latent factors existed. One latent factor corresponded to measures of psychological distress (PROMIS Sleep Disturbance, Depression, and Anxiety) and the second latent factor corresponded to physical capability (SANE, PROMIS Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Sleep Disturbance). Both PROMIS Physical Function (0.83) and Pain Interference (-0.80) more strongly weigh on the physical capability latent factor than SANE (0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

In a knee surgical population, the SANE, PROMIS Physical Function, and PROMIS Pain Interference measure the same human dimension of physical capability; however, PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference may measure this construct more effectively in isolation. The SANE may be a more viable option to gauge physical capability when computer adaptive testing is not possible.

Recovery Curve for Patients With Pilon Fractures Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System

BACKGROUND

The time frame in which patients can expect functional improvement after open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of pilon fractures is unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the trajectory and rate at which patients' physical function improves up to 2 years postinjury.

METHODS

The patients studied sustained a unilateral, isolated pilon fractures (AO/OTA 43B/C) and followed at a level 1 trauma center over a 5-year period (2015-2020). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systems (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) scores from these patients at defined follow-up times of immediately, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery defined the cohorts and were retrospectively studied.

RESULTS

There were 160 patients with PROMIS scores immediately postoperatively, 143 patients at 6 weeks, 146 patients at 12 weeks, 97 at 24 weeks, 84 at 1 year, and 45 at 2 years postoperatively. The average PROMIS PF score was 28 immediately postoperatively, 30 at 6 weeks, 36 at 3 months, 40 at 6 months, 41 at 1 year, and 39 at 2 years. There was a significant difference between PROMIS PF scores between 6 weeks and 3 months (P < .001), and between 3 and 6 months (P < .001). Otherwise, no significant differences were detected between consecutive time points.

CONCLUSION

Patients with isolated pilon fractures demonstrate the majority of their improvement in terms of physical function between 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. No significant difference was detected in PF scores after 6 months postoperatively up to 2 years. Furthermore, the mean PROMIS PF score of patients 2 years after recovery was approximately 1 SD below the population average. This information is helpful in counseling patients and setting expectations for recovery after pilon fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic.

Empfehlung für Fragebögen zur Untersuchung der Fuß- und Sprunggelenkfunktion vom Research-Komitee der AGA

Das standardisierte Erheben von Behandlungsergebnissen findet immer mehr Einzug in die moderne Medizin. Hierbei ist vor allem das subjektive Ergebnis aus Patientensicht und die damit häufig einhergehende Zufriedenheit mit der medizinischen Behandlung in den Fokus gerückt. Dies hat in den letzten Jahren nicht nur in der akademischen Landschaft, sondern auch auf gesundheitspolitischer Ebene deutlich an Bedeutung gewonnen. Dies bedeutet, dass das Behandlungsergebnis immer mehr Einfluss auf die Vergütung der Leistungserbringer erhält, auch „value-based healthcare“ genannt. Insbesondere in der Orthopädie und Traumatologie gibt es dabei zahlreiche gelenkspezifische Messinstrumente (Fragebögen, Scores oder „patient-reported outcome measures“ [PROMs]), wobei in der Fuß- und Sprunggelenkchirurgie hierfür eine Vielzahl an Fragebögen verfügbar ist, die sich jedoch häufig sehr heterogen und selten pathologiespezifisch darstellen. In Anbetracht der derzeitigen Mannigfaltigkeit an PROMs in der aktuellen Literatur ist es deshalb von Interesse, die wissenschaftliche Qualität zu prüfen und gleichzeitig die Forschungskommunikation zu vereinheitlichen, indem etablierte und gemäß akademischen Gütekriterien ausgewählte Fragebögen zum Einsatz kommen. Ziel ist es, valide, verlässliche und möglichst repräsentative Daten zu gewinnen, um eine akkurate Darstellung der tatsächlichen Ergebnisse zu erreichen. Dies bedingt neben qualitativen Kriterien auch immer kompakte und leicht verständliche Fragenkataloge, um so eine möglichst hohe Rücklaufquote zu generieren. Schließlich sollte auch immer eine Einschätzung der klinischen Relevanz der erhaltenen Ergebnisse stattfinden. Hierfür hat sich der kleinste vom Patienten als klinische Veränderung wahrgenommene Wert des jeweiligen PROM („minimal clinically important difference“, MCID) durchgesetzt. Für den Fuß- und Sprunggelenkbereich werden dabei vom Research Komitee der AGA unter Berücksichtigung dieser Kriterien folgende Messinstrumente empfohlen: FAOS (Foot and Ankle Outcome Score) zur Beurteilung der allgemeinen Schmerzsymptomatik und Funktion sowie der EQ-5D-Fragebogen zur Beurteilung der Lebensqualität. Zwar kann aufgrund fehlender Datenlage keine pathologiespezifische Empfehlung abgegeben werden, jedoch ist der FAOS für eine Vielzahl von Fuß- und Sprunggelenkpathologien validiert und liegt zudem in deutscher Sprache vor.

Minimal clinically-important differences for the 'Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs' (LOAD) and the 'Canine Orthopedic Index' (COI) client-reported outcomes measures

Client-reported outcomes measures (CROMs) have been previously validated for the evaluation of canine osteoarthritis. A published systematic review indicated that the 'Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs' (LOAD) and the 'Canine Orthopedic Index' (COI) can be recommended for use in dogs with osteoarthritis; these CROMs have also been used in the context of measuring surgical outcomes of dogs with orthopaedic conditions. However, the minimal clinically-important differences (MCIDs) for these CROMs have not been investigated. Such estimates would be useful for investigators and regulators so that these CROMs can be used in clinical trials. Data from the RCVS Knowledge Canine Cruciate Registry were extracted, and baseline and 6 week follow-up data on dogs that had received surgery for cranial cruciate ligament rupture were used to make estimates of MCIDs using distribution-based and anchor-based methods. Data from 125 dogs were categorised based on the anchor question and LOAD and COI scores analysed accordingly. The four anchor-based methods provided a range of MCIDs for each CROM (1 to 8.8 for LOAD and 3.5 to 17.6 for COI). In the two different distribution-based methods, the MCIDs for LOAD ranged from 1.5 (effect size) to 2.4 (standard error of measurement) and the effect size method yielded a result of 2.2 for COI. The results showed that the value of the MCIDs depended on the method that was applied. Receiver operator characteristic curves provided areas under the curve (AUCs) greater than 0.7, which indicated that the cut-off point was acceptable; LOAD had the greater AUC at 0.867. In summary, the authors currently recommend a MCID of '4' for LOAD and '14' for COI although further work in other clinical contexts (such as osteoarthritis associated with chronic pain) is required to add confidence to these estimates. For the first time, we have provided estimates for MCIDs for these two CROMs which will facilitate sample size estimates in future clinical studies that use these CROMs as outcomes measures.

The role of perceived patient injustice on pain related and functional outcomes in orthopaedic patients; a systematic review

Introduction

Higher levels of perceived patient injustice has been associated with higher levels of pain and poor functional outcomes in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. We wanted to investigate if there was any evidence of this association in patients who underwent orthopaedic surgery.

Materials and methods

A systematic search of the literature was performed independently by two researchers on the electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and data extracted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. Outcomes of interest were pain, pain intensity, pain interference, opiate use, disability, physical function, return to work, quality of life, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, social functioning and quality of life.

Results

Five studies were identified for qualitative analysis involving elective and trauma orthopaedic patients. All studies identified a positive correlation between higher levels of perceived injustice and depression, pain intensity and interference as well as reduced function and higher levels of disability.

Conclusions

Higher levels of perceived patient injustice is associated with worse pain and functional outcomes in patients who undergo orthopaedic surgery in the traumatic and elective setting. Further research is warranted to further elucidate this association and identify potential therapeutic interventions.

Higher Dissatisfaction Rate Following Revision Compared With Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: 1-Year Follow-up of 2151 Primary and 235 Aseptic Revision Surgeries

Postoperative patient satisfaction is related to preoperative expectations. Information regarding expected results following surgery is therefore important. This study evaluated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient satisfaction up to 1 year after primary and aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The study included 2151 primary and 235 aseptic revision TKA surgeries conducted between 2010 and 2018. Pain, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function-Short Form and European Quality of Life-5 Dimension surveys were recorded preoperatively and at 8 weeks and 1 year. To determine satisfaction, patients were asked to rate their knee function compared with that before surgery and to answer whether they would undergo the surgery again given their current knowledge. Patients who had primary TKA improved in all PROMs in each follow-up up to 1 year, whereas patients who had revision TKA showed improvement at 8 weeks with no further improvement at 1 year. In terms of patient satisfaction, 88% of patients in the primary TKA group reported better knee function, and 87% were willing to have the surgery again at 1 year; the proportions were lower for patients who underwent revision TKA (66% and 68%, respectively). Aseptic revision TKA demonstrates inferior PROMs compared with those of primary TKA 1 year after surgery, and more than 30% of the patients who underwent revision TKA stated that they would not have their TKA revised or were uncertain, given the outcome of the procedure. Thus, patients who are candidates for revision TKA should be informed to expect less of an improvement following revision surgery than with the primary TKA. Our findings can facilitate the shared decision-making process by surgeons and patients based on realistic expectations of surgical outcomes. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):e52-e57.].

The current utilization of the patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) in isolated or combined total knee arthroplasty populations

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for clinical research and patient-centric care because they allow us to capture patient perspectives on their health condition. In knee arthroplasty, PROMs are frequently used to assess the risks and benefits of new interventions, surgical approaches, and other management strategies. A few examples of PROMs used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) include the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) (collectively referred to as "legacy" PROMs). More recently, attention has been brought to another PROM called the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). PROMIS was developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and has over 300 domains assessing various aspects of patient health, including pain, physical function, and mental health. With the use of PROMIS increasing in TKA literature, there is a need to review the advancements being made in understanding and applying PROMIS for this population. Thus, the purpose of this study is to provide insight on the utilization, advantages, and disadvantages of PROMIS within the field of knee arthroplasty and to provide a comparison to legacy PROMs.

Changes in research quality and surgical trends at the international congress on early-onset scoliosis

PURPOSE

The founding of the International Congress for Early Onset Scoliosis (ICEOS) and first annual meeting in 2007 represented a significant milestone in advancing the care of patients with EOS. Due to the complexity and rarity of EOS, this annual conference is the premiere venue for physicians, researchers, and advanced practice providers to identify and understand the best treatments for children with EOS. This study examines the trend of various treatment modalities presented at ICEOS and the changes in research quality since its inception.

METHODS

Podium presentations from the 2007 through 2021 ICEOS annual meetings were reviewed to determine the number of study patients, use of a study group, and key features of study design. Treatment strategies being evaluated were recorded and included non-operative treatments (casting/bracing), traditional growing rods (TGR), vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib (VEPTR), Shilla growth guidance, magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR), and vertebral body tethering (VBT). Linear regressions were performed to analyze changes in research topic and study group utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 532 abstracts were reviewed. An average of 97.5 ± 81.3 patients were included per study with a significant increase from 42.3 ± 89.7 in 2007 to 337.6 ± 587.4 in 2021 (r² = 0.632, p < 0.001). A total of 130 (24.4%) abstracts resulted from multicenter study groups with the proportion increasing significantly from 13.0% in 2007 to 36.4% in 2021 (p = 0.039, r² = 0.289). The majority (96.2%) of study group-based projects were from either the Growing Spine Study Group (GSSG), Chest Wall and Spine Deformity Study Group (CWSDG), Children's Spine Study Group (CSSG), or the Pediatric Spine Study Group (PSSG). Additionally, a significant increase in studies utilizing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was observed (r² = 0.336, p = 0.023). Significant increases in the proportion of presentations discussing MCGR (r² = 0.738, p < 0.001) and VBT (r² = 0.294, p = 0.037) as surgical treatments were observed.

CONCLUSION

The trends in EOS device implantation observed in registry studies align with the trends in research presented at ICEOS including the increased proportion of studies focusing on MCGR and VBT over the past decade. An attempt to increase the quality of research presented at ICEOS through multicenter study groups, increased patient recruitment, and utilization of PROMs has been seen since its inception.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V.

Pre-Visit Digital Messaging Improves Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Participation Prior to the Orthopaedic Ambulatory Visit: Results from a Double-Blinded, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are metrics that assess physical health, mental health, pain, and satisfaction. However, PROM collection in orthopaedic clinics presents numerous logistical and financial challenges. These challenges are reduced when PROMs are completed before clinic encounters, relieving the workflow constraints of in-office PROM collection. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of 3 different methods with respect to pre-visit electronic PROM completion.

METHODS

Consecutive adult orthopaedic patients with no previous PROM participation were enrolled. Patients who registered with the electronic medical record (EMR) patient portal (MyChart) and with active e-mail addresses were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 arms: control (no pre-visit messages), MyChart (EMR patient portal pre-visit messages), and e-mail (e-mail pre-visit messages). The primary outcome measure was pre-visit PROM completion rates in orthopaedic patients, and the secondary outcome measures were time to pre-visit PROM form completion and PROM form completion rates according to patient demographic characteristics. By default, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) forms were available for completion through the portal by 7 days before scheduled visits. Pre-visit messages were sent 7 days prior to the scheduled visit except in the control group, with reminders sent 3 days prior if still not completed. The patients in each arm who completed all assigned forms were labeled as having total PROM completion, and those who completed at least 1 completed form were considered as having partial PROM completion. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess differences in PROM completion rates between study arms. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to compare the date of the form completion.

RESULTS

A total of 291 patients were included. The pre-visit total completion rates for assigned PROMs were higher in the MyChart arm (49% of 97 patients; p = 0.005) and the e-mail arm (52% of 100 patients; p = 0.002) in comparison with the control arm (30% of 94 patients). Male patients were more likely than female patients to have partial pre-visit PROM completion (odds ratio [OR], 1.74; p = 0.03), and Caucasian patients were more likely to have partial pre-visit PROM completion than African American patients (OR, 2.28; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Orthopaedic patients receiving either e-mail or patient portal messages demonstrated higher pre-visit PROM completion rates. Pre-visit messaging appears to be a useful strategy for increasing PROM completion rates and limiting the clinical workflow strain imposed by in-clinic PROM administration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Decreased Analgesic Effect of Tramadol in Japanese Patients with CYP2D6 Intermediate Metabolizers after Orthopedic Surgery

Tramadol is metabolized by CYP2D6 to an active metabolite, which in turn acts as an analgesic. This study aimed to investigate the impact of CYP2D6 genotype on the analgesic effect of tramadol in clinical practice. A retrospective cohort study was performed in patients treated with tramadol for postoperative pain after arthroscopic surgery for rotator cuff injury during April 2017-March 2019. The impact of CYP2D6 genotypes on the analgesic effects was assessed by the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain scoring and analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U test. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify predictive factors for the area under the time-NRS curve (NRS-AUC), which was calculated using the linear trapezoidal method. Among the 85 enrolled Japanese patients, the number of phenotypes with CYP2D6 normal metabolizer (NM) and intermediate metabolizer (IM) was n = 69 (81.1%) and n = 16 (18.9%), respectively. The NRS and NRS-AUC in the IM group were significantly higher than those in the NM group until Day 7 (p < 0.05). The multiple linear regression analysis indicated that the CYP2D6 polymorphism was a prediction factor of the high NRS-AUC levels in Days 0-7 (β = 9.52, 95% CI 1.30-17.7). In IM patients, the analgesic effect of tramadol was significantly reduced one week after orthopedic surgery in clinical practice. Therefore, dose escalation of tramadol or the use of alternative analgesic medications can be recommended for IM patients.

Ankle fractures: a systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures and their measurement properties

PURPOSE

Ankle fractures are commonly occurring fractures, especially in the aging population, where they often present as fragility fractures. The disease burden and economic costs to the patient and society are considerable. Choosing accurate outcome measures for the evaluation of the management of ankle fractures in clinical trials facilitates better decision-making. This systematic review assesses the evidence for the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in the evaluation of adult patients with ankle fractures.

METHODS

Searches were performed in CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline and Google Scholar from the date of inception to July 2021. Studies that assessed the measurement properties of a PROM in an adult ankle fracture population were included. The included studies were assessed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic reviews of PROMs.

RESULTS

In total, 13 different PROMs were identified in the 23 included articles. Only the Ankle Fracture Outcome of Rehabilitation Measure (A-FORM) presented some evidence on content validity. The Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) and Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) displayed good evidence of construct validity and internal consistency. The measurement properties of the OMAS, LEFS and SEFAS were most studied.

CONCLUSION

The absence of validation studies covering all measurement properties of PROMs used in the adult ankle fracture population precludes the recommendation of a specific PROM to be used in the evaluation of this population. Further research should focus on validation of the content validity of the instruments used in patients with ankle fractures.

Quality and reporting of patient-reported outcomes in elderly patients with hip fracture: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess how patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are reported and to assess the quality of reporting PROs for elderly patients with a hip fracture in both randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase and CENTRAL were searched on 1 March 2013 to 25 May 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

RCTs and observational studies on geriatric (≥65 years of age) patients, with one or more PRO as outcome were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Primary outcome was type of PRO; secondary outcome and quality assessment was measured by adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extension for patient-reported outcomes (CONSORT-PRO). Because of heterogeneity in study population and outcomes, data pooling was not possible.

RESULTS

3659 studies were found in the initial search. Of those, 67 were included in the final analysis. 83.6% of studies did not adequately mention missing data, 52.3% did not correctly report how PROs were collected and 61.2% did not report adequate effect size. PRO limitations were adequately reported in 20.9% of studies and interpretation of PROs was adequately reported in 19.4% of studies. Most Quality of Life (QoL) outcomes were measured by the EuroQol 5-Dimension 3-Levels, and pain as well as patient satisfaction by Visual Analogue Scale.

CONCLUSION

This study found that a high variety of PRO measures are used to evaluate geriatric hip fracture care. In addition, 47.8% of studies examining PROs in elderly patients with hip fracture do not satisfy at least 50% of the CONSORT-PRO criteria. This enables poorly conducted research to be published and used in evidence-based medicine and, consequently, shared decision-making. More efforts should be undertaken to improve adequate reporting. We believe extending the CONSORT-PRO extension to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology for observational studies would be a valuable addition to current guidelines.

Central Sensitization Is Associated with Inferior Patient-Reported Outcomes and Increased Osteotomy Site Pain in Patients Undergoing Medial Opening-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy

Background and Objectives: Studies have shown that centrally sensitized patients have worse clinical outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) than non-centrally sensitized patients. It is unclear whether central sensitization (CS) affects patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and/or level of osteotomy site pain in patients undergoing medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO). The purpose of this study was to determine whether CS is associated with PROs and osteotomy site pain following MOWHTO. Materials and Methods: A retrospective evaluation was conducted on 140 patients with varus knee osteoarthritis (OA) who were treated with MOWHTO and monitored for two years. Before surgery, the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) was used to assess CS status, and a CSI of 40 or higher was considered indicative of CS. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and pain visual analogue scale (VAS) were used to assess PROs. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the WOMAC was set as 4.2 for the pain subscore, 1.9 for the stiffness subscore, 10.1 for the function subscore, and 16.1 for the total based on the results of a previous study. The WOMAC score, pain VAS score of the osteotomy site, and the achievement rates of WOMAC MCID were compared between the CS and non-CS groups. Results: Thirty-seven patients were assigned to the CS group, whereas 84 were assigned to the non-CS group. Before surgery, the CS group showed a higher WOMAC score than the non-CS group (58.7 vs. 49.4, p < 0.05). While there was a statistically significant improvement in WOMAC subscores (pain, stiffness, function, and total) for both groups at two years after surgery (all p < 0.05), the CS group had a higher WOMAC score than the non-CS group (37.1 vs. 21.8, p < 0.05). The CS group showed significantly inferior results in pre- and postoperative changes of WOMAC subscores (pain, function, and total) relative to the non-CS group (all p < 0.05). In addition, pain at the osteotomy site was more severe in the CS group than in the non-CS group at two years after surgery (4.8 vs. 2.2, p < 0.05). Patients with CS had worse MCID achievement rates across the board for WOMAC pain, function, and total scores (all p < 0.05) compared to the non-CS group. Conclusions: Centrally sensitized patients following MOWHTO had worse PROs and more severe osteotomy site pain compared to non-centrally sensitized patients. Furthermore, the WOMAC MCID achievement rate of patients with CS was lower than that of patients without CS. Therefore, appropriate preoperative counseling and perioperative pain management are necessary for patients with CS undergoing MOWHTO. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Clinical Usefulness of SPECT/CT for Assessing Postoperative Outcomes After Medial Opening-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy

Background:

Qualitative studies have explored changes in Tc-99m hydroxymethylene diphosphonate (HDP) uptake on single-photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography (SPECT/CT) as a result of offloading after medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO) in patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. However, whether changes in the Tc-99m HDP uptake on SPECT/CT reflect the degree of clinical improvement in postoperative outcomes, especially when using minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs), has not been investigated.

Purpose:

To investigate the association between changes in Tc-99m HDP uptake on SPECT/CT and MCID-based improvement on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score in patients who underwent MOWHTO.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

The study included 35 knees in 31 patients who underwent MOWHTO. SPECT/CT was performed preoperatively and 3 years postoperatively with clinical and radiological assessments. On SPECT/CT, the knee joint was divided into 10 regions, and the radiotracer uptake amount of each region was divided by the uptake amount of the reference zone. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on whether they achieved the MCID of 16.1 points on the WOMAC at 3 years postoperatively, and changes in uptake amount on SPECT/CT were compared between the groups.

Results:

At 3 years postoperatively, 22 patients achieved the MCID on the WOMAC (62.9%; above-MCID group) and 13 patients did not (37.1%; below-MCID group). In the above-MCID group, significant improvement was observed in the WOMAC after MOWHTO (from 55.8 to 19.6; P < .05); however, significant improvement was not observed in the below-MCID group (from 38.8 to 32.3; P = .100). Based on mean change of uptake on SPECT/CT in each region, the above-MCID group showed significantly greater reduction of uptake on SPECT/CT than the below-MCID group in the femoral anteromedial compartment (P = .004), tibial anteromedial compartment (P = .009), and tibial anterolateral compartment (P = .031).

Conclusion:

Reduction in radiotracer uptake on SPECT/CT of the knee joint reflected clinical improvement in patient-reported outcomes following MOWHTO.

Reliability and Validity of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in Patients Undergoing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was developed to document outcomes from knee injury, including the impact of osteoarthritis on knee function. The purpose of this study is to determine the reliability and validity of the KOOS subscales for evaluating outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

METHODS

KOOS Pain, Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Sport, Symptoms, and Quality of Life (QoL) scores collected from 172 patients who underwent UKA were used in the analysis. KOOS subscales were tested for reliability and validity of scores through a Rasch model analysis.

RESULTS

KOOS Sport, KOOS ADL, and KOOS QoL had good evidence of reliability with acceptable person reliability, person separation, and item reliability. For overall scale functioning, KOOS Pain, Symptoms, and ADL all had 1 question that did not have an acceptable value for infit or outfit mean square value. Questions in KOOS Sport and QoL all had acceptable values. There was a positive, linear relationship between the Short-Form 12 Physical Component Summary and the KOOS subscales which indicated good evidence of convergent validity. These associations were also seen when the cohort was separated in medial and lateral UKA.

CONCLUSION

Two of the 5 KOOS subscales (KOOS Sport and KOOS QoL) were considered adequate in measuring outcomes, as well as reliability. The KOOS ADL had borderline values; however, it had adequate infit and outfit values. The KOOS Pain and Symptom score performed poorly in this analysis. For documenting outcomes following UKA, this study supports the use of KOOS ADL, Sport, and QoL.

Conflicts of interest among patients: do they exist and can they bias patient-reported outcome measures? A survey of shoulder and elbow patients

BACKGROUND

Potential conflicts of interest (COIs) are common among physicians and may bias physician-reported outcome assessment in orthopedic research. It is unclear whether patients have COIs and whether these COIs could affect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The purposes of this study were to investigate (1) the existence of COIs among patients and (2) the potential of these COIs to bias PROMs with a pseudonymized survey among consecutive shoulder and elbow patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between February and May 2021, 144 shoulder and elbow patients who underwent consultation at our outpatient clinic were included in the survey study. Of these patients, 79.2% (n = 114) completed the 11-item questionnaire. Variables including sex, existence of chronic diseases, level of education, and economic status were also assessed to investigate any association between these variables and patients' perceptions of COIs.

RESULTS

Whereas 33.3% of respondents (n = 38) believe that COIs exist among patients and 28.1% (n = 32) believe that COIs could bias PROMs in general, fewer patients admit to personal COIs (24.6%, n = 28) and COIs biasing their self-assessment (23.7%, n = 27). Patients more frequently suggest COIs in their personal environment, such as among family members or friends (27.2%, n = 31), than in their own medical treatment. Financial factors such as sick pay (34.2%, n = 39) are thought to be the most likely reason for having COIs, followed by interpersonal reasons such as maintaining medical affection or bonds (29.8%, n = 34). Of respondents, 42.1% (n = 48) believe that sole usage of PROMs poses risks in treatment evaluation and only 21% (n = 24) consider PROMs reliable. In addition, 43% of respondents (n = 49) believe that patients should disclose COIs routinely in medical treatment. Multinomial logistic regression analysis revealed that wealthier patients are more likely to believe COIs could bias PROMs (odds ratio for poor vs. middle class, 0.23 [95% confidence interval, 0.053-0.963]; odds ratio for lower-middle class vs. middle class, 0.19 [95% confidence interval, 0.052-0.677]).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the majority of shoulder and elbow patients deny having self-experienced COIs and deny biased PROMs due to COIs in their own medical treatment, a considerable number of patients admit to having experienced both. Further studies might be justified to investigate the actual clinical relevance of patients' COIs and their impact on value-based health care.

Rasch analysis of the Oxford shoulder score in a non-surgical occupational population

BACKGROUND: The Oxford shoulder score (OSS) questionnaire for measuring patient perception of shoulder disability, has not tested specifically in a non-surgical population and no study has assessed the OSS with modern psychometrics based on Rasch model (RM). OBJECTIVE: To assess the psychometric properties of the OSS using RM among health-care workers with shoulder disorders and to verify its interest in a non-surgical population. METHODS: In an occupational health department of a French hospital center, a retrospective review was performed of the medical records from June 2019 to October 2020. Responses to 110 questionnaires were examined from 55 subjects (97% of women). A polytomous Rasch model based on the Partial Credit Model was used. RESULTS: Overall fit was satisfactory, the reliability coefficient was high and an ascending order was observed with the 5 categories of the scale. Analysis of the residuals supports unidimensionality and the local independence assumption. Item performance remained stable across the subgroup examined (DIF measures). Scale to-sample targeting indicated a substantial floor effect, and the mildest impairments were not well discriminated. CONCLUSIONS: OSS presents good psychometric qualities. However, it does not clearly discriminate subjects presenting the lowest levels of impairment. Its use in a non-surgical population is questionable.

Reporting of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Randomized Controlled Trials on Shoulder Rotator Cuff Injuries Is Suboptimal and Requires Standardization

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical Relevance