Pain Is the Primary Factor Associated With Satisfaction With Symptoms for New Patients Presenting to the Orthopedic Clinic

Differences in Baseline Physical Function and Mental Health PROM Scores in Patients With Foot and Ankle Conditions

BACKGROUND

This study sought to establish normative values for baseline physical and mental health by foot and ankle diagnosis using validated PROMIS scores and to compare the correlation between these 2 outcomes across common diagnoses. Additionally, it investigated the effects associated with chronic vs acute conditions and specific diagnoses on mental health.

METHODS

We reviewed baseline PROMIS Physical Function 10a (PF10a) and PROMIS Global-Mental (PGM) scores of 14,245 patients with one of the 10 most common foot and ankle diagnoses seen at our institution between 2016 and 2021. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the relationship between PF10a and PGM by diagnosis. A multivariable regression model including age, sex, language, race, ethnicity, education level, income, and Charlson Comorbidity Index was used to determine the associated effect of diagnosis on PGM score.

RESULTS

On unadjusted analysis, patients diagnosed with an ankle fracture had the lowest mean physical function, whereas patients with hallux valgus had the highest (PF10a = 33.9 vs 46.7, P < .001). Patients with foot/ankle osteoarthritis had the lowest mean self-reported mental health, whereas patients with hallux rigidus had the highest (PGM = 49.9 vs 53.4, P < .001). PF10a and PGM scores were significantly positively correlated for all diagnoses; the correlation was strongest in patients diagnosed with foot/ankle osteoarthritis or hammertoes (r = 0.511) and weakest in patients with ankle fractures (r = 0.232) or sprains (r = 0.280). Chronic conditions, including hammertoes (β = -5.1, 95% CI [-5.8, -4.3], P < .001), foot/ankle osteoarthritis (β = -5.0, 95% CI [-5.7, -4.3], P < .001), and hallux valgus (β = -4.8, 95% CI [-5.5, -4.1], P < .001) were associated with the largest negative effects on patients' mental health.

CONCLUSION

Self-reported physical function and mental health varied across common foot and ankle diagnoses and were more tightly correlated in chronic conditions. The associations between diagnosis and mental health scores appear larger for more chronic diagnoses, including those that are generally associated with relatively unimpaired physical function.

Using PROMIS Scores to Provide Cost-Conscious Follow-up After Foot and Ankle Surgery

BACKGROUND

National campaigns in the United States, such as Choosing Wisely, emphasize that decreasing low-value office visits maximizes health care value. Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are frequently used to quantify postoperative outcomes, they have not been assessed as a tool to help guide clinicians consider alternatives or discontinue in-person follow-up visits. The purpose of this study is to assess the frequency and cost of in-person follow-up visits after patients report substantial improvement defined as 2 consecutive improvements above preoperative Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) pain interference (PI) scores.

METHODS

Retrospective PROMIS PI data were obtained between 2015 and 2020 for common elective foot (n = 759) and ankle (n = 578) surgical procedures. Patients were divided into quartiles according to their preoperative PI score. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate time to substantial improvement. Substantial improvement was defined as having 2 consecutive postoperative minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) above preoperative PROMIS PI scores. MCID was measured using the distribution-based method. Multivariable negative binomial models were used to determine the number of visits and direct associated costs after substantial improvement. The cost to payors was estimated using reimbursement rates.

RESULTS

Within 3 months, 12% to 46% of foot and 16% to 61% of ankle patients achieved substantial improvement. Results vary by preoperative pain quartile, with patients who report higher preoperative pain scores achieving earlier improvement. After achieving substantial improvement, foot and ankle patients averaged 3.60 and 4.01 follow-up visits during the remaining 9 months of the year. Visit costs averaged $266 and $322 per foot and ankle patient respectively.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative follow-up visits are time-consuming and costly. Physicians might consider objective measures, such as PROMIS PI, to determine the need, timing, and alternatives for in-person follow-up visits for elective foot and ankle surgeries after patients demonstrate reliable clinical improvement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study at a single institution.

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.

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.

Editorial Commentary: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Needs an Anchor to Correlate Pain and Satisfactory Function in New Patient Orthopaedic Visits

In today's health care climate, the patient perspective is becoming increasingly important. As the health care paradigm shifts toward value-based health care, patient-reported outcomes are becoming increasingly important for not only research but for routine clinical care. While there are many outcome instruments used for musculoskeletal care, the addition of the simple question of "how are you doing" or "are your symptoms manageable" can provide additional valuable insight to the provider and help improve care using a shared decision model. In other words, if you want to know how the patient is doing, you have to ask them. This biopsychosocial approach demonstrates caring for the entire patient. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a patient-reported outcome instrument that was developed using the biopsychosocial model and has the advantage of being administered as a computer adaptive test. It can be used across health care and is comparable across medical specialties as the scores are standardized to US population-based norms. When used in isolation, PROMIS provides an idea of how the patient is doing compared with the population but does not give the insight as to how the patient is coping with their condition. The addition of an anchor question, such as their patient acceptable symptom state, adds further understanding to the individual patient.