Examination of Randomized Trials and Corresponding Trial Registry Entries: Registration Timing and Primary Outcome Analysis in the Journal of Arthroplasty

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primary and secondary outcomes in total hip and knee arthroplasty randomized controlled trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Significant heterogeneity exists regarding patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasty randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study investigates the PROMs used as primary and secondary outcomes in contemporary arthroplasty RCTs.

METHODS

A literature search identified THA and TKA RCTs that were published in top ten impact factor orthopaedic journals from 2017 to 2021. Screening identified 241 trials: 76 THA, 157 TKA, and eight combined. Data were extracted to identify PROMs utilized as either primary or secondary outcomes and the time period of measurement.

RESULTS

Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain was the most reported primary PROM in THA (9.2%) and TKA (22.9%) trials. This was followed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) Pain (7.9%) and the Harris Hip score (6.6%) in THA trials and NRS Pain (4.5%) and the Knee Society score (4.5%) in TKA trials. Many THA (37.0%) and TKA (52.1%) trials did not clearly specify primary outcome time points. Only pain scales were reported at time points less than one week, while various joint-specific functional outcomes were reported at later time points. As secondary outcomes, the Harris Hip score (28.9%) was most common in THA trials and the Knee Society score (26.1%) was most common in TKA trials. Indeterminate primary or secondary outcomes were reported in 18.2% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary THA and TKA trials exhibit heterogeneity of PROMs as study outcomes after the first postoperative week. Our findings highlight the need for consensus in PROM reporting and better methodological reporting to improve the interpretability of RCT outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022337255.

Prospective registration of randomized clinical trials for total shoulder arthroplasty is low: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Prospective trial registration has become an important means of improving the transparency and reproducibility of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and is recommended by the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES) per the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. Herein, we performed a cross-sectional evaluation of RCTs published in JSES from 2010 to present to determine the prevalence of trial registration and consistency of outcome reporting.

METHODS

The electronic database PubMed was searched to identify all RCTs on total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) published in JSES from 2010 to 2022 using the search terms "randomized controlled trial" AND "shoulder" AND "arthroplasty OR replacement." RCTs were considered to be registered if they provided a registration number. For articles that were registered, authors also extracted the registry name, registration date, date of first enrollment, date of last enrollment, and if the primary outcomes reported in the registry were either (1) omitted, (2) newly introduced in the publication, (3) reported as a secondary outcome or vice versa, or (4) varied in timing of assessment compared to the publication. "Early" RCTs were considered those published from 2010 to 2016, whereas "later" RCTs were from 2017 to 2022.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight RCTs met inclusion criteria. There were 16 early RCTs and 42 later RCTs. Twenty-three of the 58 (39.7%) studies were registered, with 9 of 22 with an available registry (40.9%) of those being enrolled prior to patient enrollment. Nineteen of the registered studies (82.6%) provided the name of the registry and a registration number. The proportion of later RCTs that were registered was not significantly different from the early RCTs (45.2% vs. 25.0%, P = .232). Seven RCTs (31.8%) had at least 1 inconsistency compared with the registry. The most common discrepancy was the timing of the assessment (ie, follow-up period) reported in the publication vs. the registry.

DISCUSSION

Although JSES recommends prospective trial registration, less than half of shoulder arthroplasty RCTs are registered and more than 30% registered trials have at least 1 inconsistency with their registry record. More rigorous review of trial registration and accuracy is necessary to limit bias in published shoulder arthroplasty RCTs.