Validating the forgotten joint score-12 in patients after ACL reconstruction

Relationships between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Predictors of Second ACL Injuries during Unanticipated Jump Landings

BACKGROUND

Reactive and external visual-cognitive demands are prevalent in sport and likely contribute to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury scenarios. However, these demands are absent in common return-to-sport assessments. This disconnect leaves a blind spot for determining when an athlete can return to sport with mitigated re-injury risk.

PURPOSE

To characterize relationships between patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and cognitive-task interference (i.e., cognitive demands exacerbating neuromuscular impairments) for biomechanical predictors of second ACL injuries during jump landings that involved rapid unanticipated decision making.

METHODS

Thirty-six persons following primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR; 26 females/10 males, 19.8 ± 1.8 yr; 1.71 ± 0.1 m; 69.6 ± 12.8 kg, 1.5 ± 0.6 yr post-ACLR; Tegner: 6.8 ± 1.8) participated. PROMs of ACL-RSI and the Forgotten Joint Score-12 Knee (FJS-12) were selected to assess altered psychological state (e.g., confidence, attention toward knee). Jumping tasks under anticipated and unanticipated secondary jump directions were performed. Biomechanical variables were dual-task changes (unanticipated - anticipated) in 1) uninvolved limb hip rotator impulse (DTC_Uni-HRot_Imp), 2) asymmetry of knee extensor moment at initial contact (DTC_KEM_Asym), and 3) range of involved knee abduction angle (DTC_KAbA_Range). Regression models tested for relationships between PROMs and the dual-task change in biomechanical variables.

RESULTS

ACL-RSI (DTC_Uni-HRot_Imp ( P < 0.001)) and FJS-12 (DTC_KAbA_Range ( P = 0.001)) had significant relationships with dual-task change in the opposite direction as expected (worse PROM ➔ less dual-task change). A follow-up analysis indicated that dual-task change was inversely correlated with the baseline estimates for kinetic biomechanical variables (less risky single-task biomechanics ➔ greater dual-task change for Uni-HRot_Imp and KEM_Asym).

CONCLUSIONS

The collective results are consistent with higher functioning participants (better PROMs) who also demonstrate desirable biomechanics during single-task conditions being prone to demonstrating the greatest risk-associated DTC in unanticipated scenarios.

Patients' joint perception after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction as a reliable patient-reported outcome measure

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate and compare patients' joint perception (PJP) with other commonly employed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a cohort of patients following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on 108 patients who underwent ACLR between 2017 and 2021, with complete data available for visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, PJP, Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), Tegner Activity Scale, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport After Injury (ACL-RSI), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Cincinnati Knee Rating System (CKRS) and The Hospital for Special Surgery Anterior Cruciate Ligament Satisfaction Survey (HSS ACL-SS) at a mean follow-up of 3 years. Spearman's rank-order correlation was used to determine the correlations between clinical scores. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the discriminatory power of the chosen PROMs in detecting natural joint perception. Natural joint perception was defined as patients responding 'like a native or natural joint' or PJP = 1. This study hypothesized that PJP would demonstrate significant correlations with established PROMs, indicating its reliability and validity as a tool for assessing outcomes following ACLR.

RESULTS

PJP showed significant correlations with all the reported PROMs, suggesting its potential as a valid and reliable assessment tool for evaluating ACLR outcomes. The ROC curve analysis indicated a good area under the curve for identifying natural joint perception using various PROMs. According to the PJP, nearly 20% of patients reported natural joint perception.

CONCLUSION

This study evaluates PJP as a reliable tool for assessing patient outcomes following ACLR. Its significant correlation with other established PROMs underscores its potential as a valuable addition to the existing array of PROMs in ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Anterior cruciate ligament primary repair revision rates are increased in skeletally mature patients under the age of 21 compared to reconstruction, while adults (>21 years) show no significant difference: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of age as a risk factor on the revision rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) primary repair (ACLPR), dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) and bridge-enhanced ACL restoration (BEAR) compared to ACL reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for comparative studies comparing outcomes for ACLPR, DIS or BEAR to ACLR. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to assess nondifferentiated and age-differentiated (skeletally mature patients ≤21 and >21 years) ACL revision and reoperation risk, as well as results for subjective outcomes. Methodological study quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias Tool 2.0c and Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies tools.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies (n = 1277) were included. ACLR demonstrated a lower nonage-stratified revision risk at 2 years versus ACLPR, DIS and BEAR, but a similar revision risk at 5 years when compared to DIS. However, an age-stratified analysis demonstrated a significantly increased ACLPR revision risk as compared to ACLR in skeletally mature patients ≤21 years of age (risk ratios [RR], 6.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-33.87, p = 0.03), while adults (>21 years) showed no significant difference between groups (RR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.25-8.91, n.s.). Furthermore, DIS reoperation rates were significantly higher than respective ACLR rates (RR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.35-3.65, p = 0.002), whereas BEAR (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.41-2.75, n.s.) and ACLPR (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.21-3.09, n.s.) showed no differences. IKDC scores were equivalent for all techniques. However, ACLPR exhibited significantly better FJS (mean difference, 11.93; 95% CI, 6.36-17.51, p < 0.0001) and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Symptoms (mean difference, 3.01; 95% CI, 0.42-5.60, p = 0.02), along with a lower Tegner activity reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

ACLPR in skeletally mature patients ≤21 years of age is associated with up to a six-fold risk increase for ACL revision surgery compared to ACLR; however, adults (>21 years) present no significant difference. Based on the current data, age emerges as a crucial risk factor and should be considered when deciding on the appropriate treatment option in proximal ACL tears.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Item-reduced Forgotten Joint Score provides adequate psychometric properties in ACLR patients

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate content validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, construct validity, responsiveness and floor/ceiling effects of Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) for assessing functions in activities of daily living (ADL) following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and perform an item reduction of FJS.

Methods

Swedish-speaking ACLR patients in one surgical clinic were eligible. Content validity was evaluated through patient responses and patient and expert clinician relevance ratings, omitting items with low relevance. Principal component factor analysis, Cronbach's ⍺, paired t test, correlations between FJS and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Cohen's d effect sizes (ESs) and standardized response mean (SRM) were used to evaluate internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness. Floor/ceiling effects were calculated. FJS was expected to reveal one dominant factor, a Cronbach's ⍺ between 0.70 and 0.95, correlations >0.50 to all KOOS subscores, highest for ADL, moderate ES and SRM, floor/ceiling effects <15%.

Results

One hundred and seventy-six participants (103 for assessing internal consistency, construct validity, responsiveness and floor/ceiling effects; 73 for assessing test-retest reliability and content validity) were included. Item reduction yielded a nine-item FJS (FJS-9). FJS-12 and FJS-9 demonstrated sufficient content validity (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-3.1, respectively, 2.9-3.3). FJS-9 was found unidimensional, and FJS-12 was multidimensional. Cronbach's ⍺ was 0.94 for FJS, and the intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.90. FJS showed significant correlations >0.65 to all KOOS subscales, moderate ES and SRM > 0.50. No floor/ceiling effects were found.

Conclusion

FJS-9 demonstrated adequate validity for the evaluation of joint awareness in ACLR patients and can be a valuable tool to assess ADL and joint awareness.

Level of Eidence

Level III.

Editorial Commentary: The Forgotten Joint Score Is Valid, But Should Not Be Used to Compare Heterogeneous Procedures

Patient-reported outcome measures are sometimes difficult to use. In contrast, the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is efficient and easy for patients to understand. FJS is used to assess patient awareness of joint symptoms or more specifically, as indicated by the word "forgotten," the lack thereof. Another advantage of the FJS is that it is quite discriminating compared with other patient-reported outcome measures, which may show low ceiling effects, meaning that a maximum score is easy to achieve. The FJS is valuable, but it should not be used to compare heterogeneous procedures.

Low Ceiling Effects of the Forgotten Joint Score Compared With Legacy Measures After Joint-Preserving Procedures: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To determine, in patients undergoing joint preservation procedures, whether the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) compares favorably with legacy measures.

METHODS

Medical databases (including PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases) were queried for publications with the terms "Forgotten Joint Score" and "hip," "knee," "arthroscopy," or "ACL." Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodologic quality was assessed through the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist, and psychometric data were evaluated for ceiling or floor effects, convergent validity, internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness, measurement invariance, and measurement error by 2 fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons (B.D.K. and W.T.H.).

RESULTS

Data were collected from 14 studies using the FJS after joint-preserving procedures in 911 patients (959 joints). Four studies reported strong internal consistency with an average Cronbach α of 0.92. Two studies reported responsiveness with an effect size ranging from 0.6 to 1.16. One study reported reproducibility with an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.9 (95% confidence interval, 0.8-0.9). One study reported measurement error with an minimum detectable change (MDC)individual of 32% and MDCgroup of 4.5%. Studies reported moderate to very strong convergent validity across legacy measures for hip and knee preservation surgery. Ceiling effects were favorable compared with many legacy scores for hip and knee preservation. Three studies reported the minimal clinically important difference whereas 1 study reported the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the FJS.

CONCLUSIONS

The FJS is a methodologically sound outcome measure used to evaluate patient outcomes after hip and knee preservation surgery with overall low ceiling effects compared with legacy measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Impact of Sports Participation on Achievement of Clinically Relevant Outcomes 2 Years After ACL Reconstruction

Background

Clinically relevant threshold values associated with patient-reported outcome measures after orthopaedic procedures such as anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are important for relating these scores to meaningful postoperative improvement.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to determine the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS-CAT) after ACLR. It was hypothesized that preoperative sport participation would have an impact on PASS achievement.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

Included were consecutive patients who underwent primary assisted ACLR between January 4 and August 1, 2016. Patients were administered the PROMIS-CAT Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference domains preoperatively and at a minimum 2 years postoperatively, with external anchor questions used to determine the PASS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the entire study population as well as separately for athletes and nonathletes to determine PROMIS PASS thresholds for each population. A previously published PROMIS-PF minimal clinically important difference was used to evaluate postoperative improvement. A post hoc multivariate nominal logistic multivariate analysis was constructed to assess the effects of preoperative patient characteristics on the likelihood of attaining both the minimal clinically important difference and PASS.

Results

In total, 112 patients were included in the study, with 79 (71%) having recreational or higher levels of athletic participation. The PASS for the study population was 56.0 (area under the ROC curve, 0.86) and was unaffected by baseline PROMIS-PF scores but was affected by preoperative athletic participation (56.0 for athletes, 49.0 for nonathletes). A post hoc analysis found 57 patients (51%) achieved the PASS for the PROMIS-PF (cutoff, 56.0), but when the athlete and nonathlete thresholds were applied to their respective patient groups, 66% of athletes and 64% of nonathletes achieved the PASS postoperatively. The multivariate analysis found that sport participation (odds ratio, 6.2; P = .001) but not age, sex, body mass index, or preoperative PROMIS affected the likelihood of achieving the PASS on the PROMIS-PF.

Conclusion

Preoperative athletic participation significantly affected the ability to achieve PASS.

Reliability and validity of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 for total ankle replacement and ankle arthrodesis

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the reliability and validity of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12)-a measure of patients' ability to forget their joints in daily life-in patients who underwent total ankle replacement (TAR) or ankle arthrodesis (AA).

METHODS

Patients who underwent TAR or AA were recruited from seven hospitals. The patients completed the Japanese version of FJS-12 twice, at an interval of two weeks, at a minimum of one year postoperatively. Additionally, they answered the Self-Administered Foot Evaluation Questionnaire and EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level as comparators. The construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, and floor and ceiling effects were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients (median age, 72 years), comprising 50 and 65 patients in the TAR and AA groups respectively, were evaluated. The mean FJS-12 scores were 65 and 58 for the TAR and AA groups, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (P = 0.20). Correlations between the FJS-12 and Self-Administered Foot Evaluation Questionnaire subscale scores were good to moderate. The correlation coefficient ranged from 0.39 to 0.71 and 0.55 to 0.79 in the TAR and AA groups, respectively. The correlation between the FJS-12 and EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level scores was poor in both groups. The internal consistency was adequate, with Cronbach's α greater than 0.9 in both groups. The intraclass correlation coefficients of test-retest reliability was 0.77 and 0.98 in the TAR and AA groups, respectively. The 95% minimal detectable change values were 18.0 and 7.2 points in the TAR and AA groups, respectively. No floor or ceiling effect was observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The Japanese version of FJS-12 is a valid and reliable questionnaire for measuring joint awareness in patients with TAR or AA. The FJS-12 can be a useful tool for the postoperative assessment of patients with end-stage ankle arthritis.

Use of the forgotten joint score (FJS)-12 to evaluate knee awareness after quadriceps tendon reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Quadriceps tendon rupture (QTR) is a severe injury of the knee extensor apparatus. The study aims to validate the use of forgotten joint score (FJS-12) for functional outcome assessing after surgical treatment of QTR.

METHODS

Fifty-seven patients who underwent surgery for QTR with transosseous suture reconstruction in a single orthopaedic surgery and traumatology center between 2015 and 2020 were eligible for enrolment in this retrospective case series. The demographic data and other pre-operative details such as age, gender, comorbidities and medication use also were extracted from the medical records. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were gathered in the form of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index Score (WOMAC), Tegner Activity Score (TAS), Lysholm Score and FJS-12 at a mean follow-up time of 49.84 months ± 20.64 months. The FJS-12 was validated by correlation with WOMAC, TAS and Lysholm Score.

RESULTS

The mean age of all patients were 69.2 ± 13.6 years with 51 (89.5%) males and 6 (10.5%) females. The mean time from injury to surgery was 3.39 ± 5.46 days. All patients reported satisfactory functional outcomes after surgery on FJS-12, WOMAC and Lysholm scores, except the TAS, which decreased slightly from pre-operative level. There was a high negative correlation between WOMAC and FJS-12, but moderate positive correlations between FJS-12 and TAS and Lysholm scores. The Cronbach's alpha value was 0.96 for 12 items in FJS-12.

CONCLUSION

This study has found that FJS-12 is a reliable and easy to assess tool for functional outcomes after QTR reconstruction. It has shown moderate to strong correlation with other commonly used outcome measures (WOMAC, TAS and Lysholm).

A Modified Version of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 in Lower Limb Amputees: Validity and Reliability Study

Adaptation to prosthesis is important for occupation, quality of life, and participation in social life, so it needs to be evaluated. The aim of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) in lower limb amputees. The FJS-12 was applied to 80 amputees. Criterion-referenced validity was assessed using the activity restriction subparameter of Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scale (TAPES). The internal consistency of the FJS-12 was high (Cronbach's α = .943). A statistically significant very good negative correlation was determined between the FJS-12 and the activity restriction subparameter of TAPES (r = -.641; p < .001). The results of this study showed that FJS-12 is a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used to assess the adaptation to prosthesis in amputees. Evaluation of prosthesis awareness in daily living activities of amputees is important in terms of establishing occupational therapy and rehabilitation programs.

Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score in patients with total hip arthroplasty

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgeries are increasing; to assess quality of life after THA, an instrument that considers patient's perspective on surgical outcomes is necessary. The objective of this study is to assess the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-I) in patients with THA. The FJS-I was administered to 111 patients with THA, as well as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and the EuroQol 5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L). Structural validity [confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)], internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), test-retest reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1 )], measurement error [standard error of the measurement (SEM)], and construct validity (hypothesis testing with correlation of the WOMAC, NPRS, and EQ-5D-5L) were assessed. In addition, the minimal detectable change (MDC) was computed. The result of CFA confirmed the one-factor structure. Internal consistency was supported (α = 0.944). A high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.958; 95% confidence interval, 0.914-0.980) was found with an SEM and an MDC of 5.3 and 16.6 points, respectively. The a-priori hypotheses were fully met, determining the construct validity to be satisfactory. Psychometric properties of the FJS-I were confirmed, and it can be used for single-person assessment. Further research is suggested to refine its structural validity.

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Patient Acceptable Symptom State, and Clinical Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair Versus Reconstruction: A Matched-Pair Analysis From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

There has been increasing interest in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair because of theoretical advantages over ACL reconstruction; however, the contemporary literature has failed to provide high-quality evidence to demonstrate these advantages.

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and functional outcomes of ACL repair versus ACL reconstruction at a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ACL repair were propensity matched (based on demographics, time between injury and surgery, knee laxity parameters, presence of meniscal lesions, preoperative activity level, and sport participation), in a 1:1 ratio, to those who underwent ACL reconstruction during the same period. Isokinetic testing was used to evaluate strength deficits at 6 months postoperatively. Knee laxity parameters were evaluated at 12 months. Complications, return to sport, and patient-reported outcome scores were recorded at final follow-up.

RESULTS

In total, 75 matched pairs (150 patients) were evaluated. The repair group had significantly better mean hamstring muscle strength at 6 months compared with the reconstruction group (1.7% ± 12.2% vs -10.0% ± 12.8%, respectively; P < .0001). At a mean final follow-up of 30.0 ± 4.8 months, the repair group had a significantly better mean Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) score compared with the reconstruction group (82.0 ± 15.1 vs 74.2 ± 21.7, respectively; P = .017). Noninferiority criteria were met for ACL repair, compared with ACL reconstruction, with respect to the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee score (86.8 ± 9.0 vs 86.7 ± 10.1, respectively; P < .0001) and side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference (1.1 ± 1.4 vs 0.6 ± 1.0 mm, respectively; P < .0001). No significant differences were found for other functional outcomes or the pivot-shift grade. There were no significant differences in the rate of return to the preinjury level of sport (repair group: 74.7%; reconstruction group: 60.0%; P = .078). A significant difference was observed regarding the occurrence of ACL reruptures (repair group: 5.3%; reconstruction group: 0.0%; P = .045). Patients who experienced a failure of ACL repair were significantly younger than those who did not (26.8 vs 40.7 years, respectively; P = .013). There was no significant difference in rupture rates between the repair and reconstruction groups when only patients aged >21 years were considered (2.9% vs 0.0%, respectively; P = .157). The minimal clinically important difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds were defined for the ACL repair group. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the repair group achieved the PASS for the FJS-12 compared with their counterparts in the reconstruction group (77.3% vs 60.0%, respectively; P = .034).

CONCLUSION

ACL repair was associated with some advantages over ACL reconstruction including superior hamstring muscle strength at 6 months and significantly better FJS-12 scores. However, the failure rate was significantly higher after ACL repair, and younger patients were particularly at risk.

Primary Repair versus Reconstruction in Patients with Bilateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: What Do Patients Prefer?

Purpose. The purpose is to evaluate knee preference and functional outcomes of patients with primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair in one knee and ACL reconstruction in the contralateral side. Methods. All patients who underwent both procedures were retrospectively reviewed at minimum two-year follow-up. Patients were asked to complete questionnaires regarding their operated knees’ preferences during rehabilitation, daily activities, sports activities, and overall function. Furthermore, the Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee, Forgotten Joint Score-12, and Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury were completed. Results. Twenty-one patients were included. All patients underwent ACL reconstruction first, which was displayed at younger age at surgery (24 vs. 33 years, $p=0.010$ ) and longer follow-up (10.2 vs. 2.3 years, $p<0.001$ ), respectively. Thirty-three percent preferred the repaired knee, 11% the reconstructed knee, and 56% had no preference; however, 78% indicated that their repaired knee was less painful during rehabilitation and 83% reported earlier range of motion (ROM) return following repair, which was similar for both knees in 17%. Eighty-three percent of patients indicated better function and progression during rehabilitation with their repaired knee and 11% with their reconstructed knees. No statistical differences were found in patient-reported outcomes between both procedures (all $p>0.4$ ). Objective laxity assessment showed mean side-to-side difference of 0.6 mm between both sides in favor of the reconstructed knee. Conclusion. This study showed that ACL repair and ACL reconstruction lead to similar functional outcomes. However, patients undergoing both procedures may have less pain, earlier ROM return, and faster rehabilitation progression following primary repair.

Comparison of joint awareness after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy: a retrospective multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and high tibial osteotomy (HTO) are established treatments for medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) or osteonecrosis (ON) of the knee joint, and the predominance of either procedure is inconclusive. We compared the awareness of the knee after UKA and HTO using the Forgotten joint score-12 (FJS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, multicenter study. Ninety-six knees of 90 patients who received UKA or HTO and were followed-up for at least 1 year were analyzed. Postoperative FJS was compared between the two groups and evaluated for the effect of patient-related factors and clinical outcomes. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to predict FJS.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the FJS between the UKA and HTO groups (p = 0.24). FJS did not correlate with any of the patient-related factors. There was a correlation between the FJS and each item of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) and Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale (LKS). In multiple linear regression analysis, lower BMI, the diagnosis of OA Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade ≥ 3, and ON were significant predictors of better FJS. In both groups, FJS was correlated with each item of the KOOS and LKS. Internal consistency in terms of Cronbach's alpha was excellent.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in FJS between patients who underwent UKA and HTO. Lower BMI, the diagnosis of OA KL grade ≥ 3, and ON were significant predictors of better FJS.

Investigating and defining outcomes of suprapatellar versus infrapatellar intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures: a protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial

Background

Anterior knee pain is often reported following intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures. The aetiology remains unclear, but the surgical approach may play an important role. To date, no biomechanically validated method exists to assess patient outcomes specific to anterior knee pain in this cohort. The central aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the feasibility of a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) investigating the influence of surgical approach on intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures (suprapatellar versus infrapatellar nailing), (2) explore differences in clinical outcomes between the approaches, and (3) explore the development of a biomechanically validated methodology for assessing post-operative anterior knee pain and knee function specific to intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures.

Methods

This pilot study will follow a prospective randomised controlled design at the Royal Adelaide Hospital and The Queen Elizabeth Hospital (South Australia). This study aims to recruit 60 patients between 18 and 60 years old who will be randomly assigned to either the suprapatellar or infrapatellar approach following a decision for intramedullary surgical fixation by the treating surgeon. All nails in this study will be Stryker T2 Alpha nails. Patients will undergo standard radiograph, magnetic resonance imaging, and clinical assessments in-line with their standard operative care, and complete a number of patient-reported and performance-based outcome measures. Performance-based outcome measures will be assessed utilising three-dimensional motion capture techniques. Follow-up time points are 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. Feasibility outcomes include ability to meet enrolment and retention metrics, compliance with all questionnaires and assessment procedures, and the occurrence of any adverse events. The primary clinical outcome is the incidence of anterior knee pain at 12 months after surgery.

Discussion

This study will establish the feasibility and inform the design of a large-scale RCT. Evaluation of all clinical data and patient outcomes will lead to the development of a new tool for assessing patient outcomes in this cohort. Limitations of the study include an unpredictable enrolment rate and loss to follow-up, small sample size, and the unknown ability of three-dimensional motion analysis to pick up the effects of anterior knee pain after tibial nailing.

Trial registration

This trial was prospectively registered on the 7 February 2020 on ANZCTR, ACTRN12620000109909.

Joint awareness and return to pre-injury level of activities after ACL reconstruction in athletes vs non-athletes

PURPOSE

The outcome of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the non-athlete population is under-reported. The study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of ACLR in the non-athlete and athlete population by patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)- International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Lysholm knee scoring scale, Forgotten joint score (FJS-12) and return to pre-injury activity level. The study also correlated the FJS-12 score with other commonly used PROM's (IKDC and Lysholm).

METHODS

This was a prospective comparative study including patients undergoing ACLR. Patients were divided into two groups. Group-1 (non-athletes) and Group-2 (athletes, defined as those with pre-injury Tegner activity level > 5). Demographic profile, management of associated meniscal injury, perioperative and midterm complications were noted. All patients had 24 months follow-up. Knee laxity assessment by pivot shift test, functional outcome scores (Lysholm and IKDC) and FJS-12 were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

Group 1 and 2 included 69 and 47 participants, respectively, (total 116 patients). The mean age of group 1 was significantly higher than group 2 (33.1 ± 8.0 vs 25.0 ± 4.9 years; p < 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in PROMs and FJS-12 scores between the groups at any follow-up. Return to pre-injury Tegner activity level post-ACLR was 88.4% (n = 61) and 46.8% (n = 22) in group 1 and 2, respectively (p). The ceiling effect in FJS-12, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were achieved by 9.3%, 19.5%, and 34.7% of patients (n = 116), respectively, at 2-year follow-up. The ceiling effect of FJS-12, Lysholm, and IKDC scores between the groups at final follow-up was not statistically significant (p = 1, p = .524, p = .09, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The functional outcome of ACLR was comparable between athletes and non-athletes. FJS-12 has a lower ceiling effect and better discriminatory power than Lysholm and IKDC scores. FJS-12 score can be satisfactorily used in ACLR to observe and monitor changes in patient satisfaction and outcome.

LEVEL OF STUDY

II, Prospective comparative study.

Effects of Low-Load Blood-Flow Restricted Resistance Training on Functional Capacity and Patient-Reported Outcome in a Young Male Suffering From Reactive Arthritis

Introduction: Reactive arthritis (ReA) is a chronic inflammatory disease usually caused by a preceding gastrointestinal or genitourinary bacterial infection. ReA usually occurs in the lower limbs causing joint pain and joint swelling. Physiotherapy-led exercise is recommended to prevent muscle atrophy. The purpose of this case report is to describe the outcome after 12 weeks of low-load blood flow restricted resistance training (BFR-RT) as a rehabilitation method for a young male suffering from ReA.

Methods and materials: A 17-year-old male suffered from ReA in the both knee joints and the left hip joint. 36 months after the incident, he suffered from another ReA incident in his right knee. Non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs and a new arthrocentesis added with corticosteroid injection was unsuccessful in treating the ReA. The patient performed 12 weeks of BFR-RT on the right lower limb with a low amount of supervision after the first week of training. Assessment of unilateral 30-sec chair stand test (u30-sec CST), low-thigh circumference above apex patella, The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), The Forgotten Knee Joint Score (FJS), and Numeric Ranking Scale for pain (NRS) was performed at baseline and after 3,6,9, and 12 weeks of BFR-RT.

Results: The patient completed all planned exercise sessions. u30-sec CST improved with 7 repetitions (reps) on the right limb and 5 reps on the left leg. Low-thigh circumference decreased 1.1 cm on the right leg and 1.0 on the left leg. KOOS symptoms, ADL, quality of life and FJS demonstrated a clinically relevant change on 10, 14 and 23 points.

Conclusion: The present case study indicates that even with low amounts of supervision BFR-RT could increase functional performance, reduce knee joint swelling and improve key patient-reported outcome.

Changes and thresholds in the Forgotten Joint Score after total hip arthroplasty : minimal clinically important difference, minimal important and detectable changes, and patient-acceptable symptom state

AIMS

The aim of this study was to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal important change (MIC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) in the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) according to patient satisfaction six months following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in a UK population.

METHODS

During a one-year period, 461 patients underwent a primary THA and completed preoperative and six-month FJS, with a mean age of 67.2 years (22 to 93). At six months, patient satisfaction was recorded as very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. The difference between patients recording neutral (n = 31) and satisfied (n = 101) was used to define the MCID. MIC for a cohort was defined as the change in the FJS for those patients declaring their outcome as satisfied, whereas receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the MIC for an individual and the PASS. Distribution-based methodology was used to calculate the MDC.

RESULTS

Using satisfaction as the anchor, the MCID for the FJS was 8.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7 to 15.9; p = 0.040), which was affirmed when adjusting for confounding. The MIC for the FJS for a cohort of patients was 17.7 (95% CI 13.7 to 21.7) and for an individual patient was 18. The MDC90 for the FJS was eight, meaning that 90% of patients scoring more than this will have experienced a real change that is beyond measurement error. The PASS threshold for the FJS was defined as 29.

CONCLUSION

The MCID and MIC can be used respectively to assess whether there is a clinical difference between two groups, or whether a cohort or patient has had a meaningful change in their FJS. Both values were greater than measurement error (MDC90), suggesting a real change. The PASS threshold for the postoperative FJS can be used as a marker of achieving patient satisfaction following THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1759-1765.

Good Validity and High Internal Consistency of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 in Patients After Medial Opening Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy

BACKGROUND

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) was originally developed to assess awareness of an artificial joint. Medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO), an alternative surgical method of knee replacement, is a joint-preservation surgery; therefore, joint awareness should be used to evaluate its clinical results. However, FJS-12 has not been validated as a tool to evaluate the postoperative results of MOWHTO. This study aimed to validate FJS-12 in MOWHTO.

METHODS

Patients with bilateral knee surgery, previous knee surgery, flexion contracture >15°, varus alignment >20°, and patients without plate removal surgery were excluded. Finally, 71 knees of 71 patients were analyzed, with a mean follow-up of 34.5 months. The FJS-12 score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were obtained, and the floor and ceiling effect of each score was investigated. Cronbach's α was calculated to determine the internal consistency of FJS-12. Spearman's correlation coefficients between FJS-12 and KOOS were calculated to assess convergent validity.

RESULTS

There were ceiling effects in 3 KOOS subscales (symptoms [25.4%], pain [15.5%], and activities of daily living [25.4%]) but not in FJS-12 (8.5%). No floor effect was noted in any patient-reported outcome measures. The total Cronbach's α was 0.9457 in FJS-12. FJS-12 showed moderate-to-strong positive correlations with all KOOS subscales (r = 0.64-0.72).

CONCLUSION

FJS-12 showed a lower ceiling effect than KOOS and high internal consistency and convergent validity in patients following MOWHTO. With its low ceiling effect, FJS-12 was found to be useful for evaluating patients following MOWHTO.

Reliable Internal Consistency and Adequate Validity of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 after Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair

Purpose

To validate the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) as a subjective outcome metric for patients undergoing arthroscopic primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair.

Methods

In this retrospective study, all patients undergoing primary ACL repair for complete isolated proximal tears between 2008 and 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were contacted and asked to complete the FJS-12, Lysholm Knee Score, modified Cincinnati score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale at a minimum of 1 year of follow-up. Internal consistency, convergent validity, and ceiling effects were analyzed.

Results

Ninety-six patients could be included (62%), with a mean FJS-12 score of 86.9 ± 14.0 (range, 31.3-100). The FJS-12 showed reliable internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89). Construct validity was moderate to strong (r = 0. 621-0.702). Ceiling effect for the FJS-12 was 21.9%, which was lower than for the Lysholm (44.6%), modified Cincinnati (45.1%), equal to the IKDC subjective (21.9%), and SANE score (22.0%) but higher compared to the ACL-RSI (12.8%). Furthermore, internal consistency for the other scores was also good to excellent (range Cronbach’s alpha = 0.627-0.953).

Conclusion

The FJS-12 shows high internal consistency and construct validity after primary ACL repair. Furthermore, this metric showed equal or less ceiling effect than most other scores, although still notable. This study suggests that the FJS-12 is an easy and validated outcome metric to evaluate subjective primary repair outcomes.

Level of Evidence

Level III, diagnostic study.

Use of the forgotten joint score (FJS)-12 to evaluate knee awareness after isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with and without meniscus repair or partial meniscectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare knee awareness, based on the FJS-12 score, among three patient groups: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), ACLR + meniscus repair and ACLR + partial meniscectomy. The relationship between FJS-12 scores and scores on other instruments (Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner Activity Level Scale, KOOS and WOMAC) was also evaluated.

METHODS

Forty-three patients were divided into group A (isolated ACLR) group B (ACLR + meniscectomy) and group C (ACLR + meniscus repair). Graft thickness, femoral tunnel width, tibial tunnel width, tibial screw thickness and follow-up time were evaluated in all three groups. The subjective knee scores (KOOS, WOMAC, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner Activity Level Scale and FJS-12) of the groups were then compared.

RESULTS

FJS-12 scores of 43 patients were evaluated. The mean age was 26.1 ± 6.5 years (range: 18-40 years). Group A: 23; group B: 9 and group C include 11 patients. The mean FJS-12 score of group B (median: 100 [range: 98-100]) was higher than that the others. Spearman's rho test showed that the FJS-12 is highly compatible with the other scores.

CONCLUSION

According to this study, FJS-12 and the other scoring systems showed that ACLR with partial meniscectomy is the most effective surgical method to restore normal sensation in the knee.

The forgotten joint score-12 is a valid and responsive outcome tool for measuring success following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome

PURPOSE

The forgotten joint score-12 (FJS-12) is an outcome questionnaire designed to evaluate joint awareness. The responsiveness and validity of the English language version of the FJS-12 in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is not known.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for a diagnosis of FAI were prospectively followed up over a 1 year period. Patients completed preoperative and postoperative FJS-12, EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D-5L), and the 12-item international hip outcome tool (iHOT-12). We evaluated construct validity with Spearman correlation coefficients for the FJS-12, and responsiveness by way of effect size and ceiling effects.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients underwent hip arthroscopy, of which 42 (91%) completed post-operative PROMs at 1 year follow-up. Construct validity was strong with the iHOT-12 (r = 0.87) and also the EQ-5D-5L (r = 0.83). The median postoperative FJS score was 50.2 (IQR 64). The mean change in score for the FJS-12 was 31 points (SD 31) (p < 0.001), with an effect size (Cohen's d) of 1.16. Preoperatively, three patients scored the lowest possible value resulting in a floor effect of 7.1%. Similarly, only three patients (7.1%) scored the best possible score post-operatively.

CONCLUSION

This is the first evaluation of the joint awareness concept in the English language version of the FJS-12 following hip arthroscopy for FAI. The FJS-12 is a valid and responsive tool for the assessment of this cohort of patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Tendon Graft and Femoral Cortical Button Fixation at Minimum 20-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

The short-term outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone or hamstring tendon (HT) graft are excellent with good clinical stability and patient-reported outcomes. Although some studies have reported the long-term outcomes of bone-patellar tendon-bone graft ACL reconstruction, few have reported the outcomes of HT graft ACL reconstruction.

PURPOSE

To assess clinical and radiographic outcomes of HT graft ACL reconstruction with femoral cortical button fixation at a minimum 20-year follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A prospective study was performed in which all patients undergoing isolated transtibial primary ACL reconstruction between 1994 and 1996 with HT graft and femoral cortical button fixation were assessed clinically and radiographically. Follow-up was obtained in 48 of 94 patients (51%). Median (interquartile range) age at operation was 31 years (26-39 years); median follow-up was 21 years (20-22 years); 65% were male; and 48% had meniscal injury at surgery and underwent partial meniscectomy. Graft rupture, reoperation, and contralateral injury rates were assessed; clinical stability was measured using the KT-1000 arthrometer; patient-reported outcomes were assessed (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Lysholm, Forgotten Joint Score, Tegner activity, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Anterior Cruciate Ligament Quality of Life [ACL-QOL], EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level [EQ-5D-5L]); and radiographic osteoarthritis (defined as Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥2) was assessed for the ipsilateral and the contralateral knee.

RESULTS

Graft rupture occurred in 4 patients (8%), contralateral injury in 4 patients (8%), and reoperation in 15 patients (31%), which consisted mainly of meniscal tears or hardware removal. In patients with an intact graft, excellent patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were noted, with a median Lysholm of 90 (78-100), subjective IKDC of 86 (72-95), and KOOS-Sports of 86 (58-100). There was low awareness of the operated knee (Forgotten Joint Score, 81 [60-96]) and good quality of life (ACL-QOL, 85 [75-94]; EQ-5D-5L, 0.87 [0.83-1.00]). Median side-to-side difference, as measured with the KT-1000 arthrometer, was 1 mm (-1 to 3 mm). Radiographic osteoarthritis was evident in 49% of ipsilateral and 10% of contralateral knees and was associated with meniscectomy at index surgery and decreased PROMs at follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Long-term outcomes of transtibial HT graft ACL reconstruction with femoral cortical button fixation are generally good with a low failure rate, low awareness of the operated knee, and good clinical stability. Radiographic osteoarthritis was evident in approximately half of the patients at 20-year follow-up and was associated with meniscectomy at index surgery and decreased PROMs at follow-up.

Patient-reported outcomes of 7133 distal femoral, patellar, and proximal tibial fracture patients: A national cross-sectional study with one-, three-, and five-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Few studies have described patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in knee fracture patients. We reported knee-specific and generic median PROM scores after knee fracture and identified risk factors for poor outcome defined by low median PROM scores.

METHODS

In a Danish cross-sectional study of 7133 distal femoral, patellar, and proximal tibial fracture patients during 2011-2017, OKS, FJS-12, EQ5D-5L Index, and EQ5D-5L Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), were collected electronically (response rate 53%; median age 60; 63% female). Poor outcome was defined as score lower than median PROM score. Poor outcome risk factors were estimated as odds ratios from binary logistic regression models.

RESULTS

At 0 to one year after knee fracture, median PROM scores were 31 (OKS), 27 (FJS-12), 0.50 (EQ5D-5L Index), and 74 (EQ5D-5L VAS). At >5 years after knee fracture, median OKS score was 40, median FJS-12 score was 54, median EQ5D-5L Index was 0.76, and median EQ5D-5L VAS score was 80. Age > 40 years had higher odds for poor OKS and FJS-12 scores at short- and long-term follow-up after knee fracture. Comorbidity burden, distal femoral fracture, and treatment with external fixation and knee arthroplasty were risk factors for poor outcome at long-term follow-up, for all four PROMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Although knee fracture patients have relatively high knee function and quality of life, their ability to forget about the knee joint after knee fracture is compromised. We identified several important risk factors for poor outcome measured by PROMs at different follow-up periods following knee fracture, which will help direct future quality-improvement initiatives.

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 in Anterior Cruciate Ligament injuries

PURPOSE

The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) is a scoring system initially created to assess post arthroplasty outcomes. It has since been used to evaluate Anterior Cruciate Ligament surgery outcomes. Our study aims to evaluate the applicability and validity of the FJS-12 in post Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstructed patients, and to assess correlation with established Patient Reported Outcome Measure Scores in the same population.

DESIGN

Case series, level 3 evidence.

METHODS

We conducted a cross sectional study across patients who had undergone Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction and carried out the FJS-12 questionnaire by phone interview. Patients who had undergone primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction were considered for the study.

RESULTS

The average Forgotten Joint Score-12 for all 82 patients was 71.4 (±22.9), which corresponded to a normal distribution. The average Lysholm and Tegner score at the 2-year post-operative visit was 93.5 ± 9.5 and 5.8 ± 1.8 respectively and the distribution was non-normal. We noticed a large ceiling effect of 42.7% in the Lysholm scores, but only 8.4% in FJS-12. There was a weak correlation with Lysholm and a positive correlation with Tegner.

CONCLUSIONS

Forgotten Joint Score-12 seems to be a promising patient reported outcome measure that can be used in evaluating post Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction outcomes. It is more discerning than traditional scores and is easy to administer thus it can used in the clinical follow-up of patients. With the scores being normally distributed, it makes for a meaningful PROMS and would allow more accurate application of parametric statistical tests.

Affordance-Based Surgical Design Methods Considering Biomechanical Artifacts

Surgical design in personalized medicine is often based on native anatomy, which may not accurately reflect the interaction between native musculoskeletal tissues and biomechanical artifacts. To overcome this problem, researchers have developed alternative methods based on affordance-based design. The design process can be viewed in terms of action possibilities provided by the (biological) environment. Here, we use the affordance-based approach to address possibilities for action offered by biomechanical artifacts. In anterior crucial ligament (ACL) reconstruction, the design goal is to avoid ligament impingement while optimizing the placement of the tibial tunnel. Although in the current rationale for tibial tunnel placement roof impingement is minimized to avoid a negative affordance, we show that tibial tunnel placement can rather aim to constrain the target bounds with respect to a positive affordance. We describe the steps for identifying the measurable invariants and provide a mathematical framework for the surgery affordances within the knee.

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 as a valuable patient-reported outcome measure for patients after first-time patellar dislocation

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to assess joint awareness after first-time patellar dislocation using the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) and to compare performance of this measurement tool to acknowledged patient-reported outcome scores.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with confirmed first-time patellar dislocation was performed. Patients were assessed with the FJS-12, the Kujala and the WOMAC scores. Reference values for the FJS-12 were obtained from a matched healthy control group with no history of previous knee joint pathology. We calculated Cronbach's alpha, assessed the ceiling effect for all scores, and calculated the Spearman correlation coefficient between them RESULTS: Fifty-six patients (mean follow-up 8.2 years, range 1.6-14.1) with a mean age of 26.4 years were analysed. Compared with the age- and gender-matched control group, the patellar dislocation group showed significantly lower (worse) mean FJS-12 scores (88 vs. 71, P < 0.001). Inter-score correlation between the FJS-12 and the Kujala was high (r = 0.74) and significant (P < 0.001), as well as between FJS-12 and WOMAC (r = 0.81, P < 0.001). Cronbach's alpha of the FJS-12 was 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.90-0.94). The FJS-12 showed less ceiling effect (16%) compared with the Kujala score (23%) and the WOMAC score (32%).

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of joint awareness has been successfully applied to a patient population after patellar dislocation. The FJS-12 showed less ceiling effect compared with the Kujala and the WOMAC scores, suggesting the score was able to capture subtle knee problems in patients after patellar dislocation.

Editorial Commentary: The Forgotten Joint Score-Don't Compare Apples to Oranges

Patient outcomes have become focused on satisfaction with the end result. It is now appreciated that objective measurements are not the sole criterion for a successful surgical procedure. With the transition to evaluating patient-reported outcome measures, additional scoring techniques are being used to determine the best method for defining surgical success. The Forgotten Joint Score asks the simple question, "Are you aware of the joint that had surgery?" Essentially, does the patient have any sense that there has been surgery on the limb or joint? Although it has been validated as a reliable testing technique in specific surgical procedures, it has not been validated as a method of comparing 2 dissimilar surgical procedures. One must be selective and careful when using scoring methods. There are no data or validation to support the use of patient perception of the joint on surgical procedures that are divergent in their approach. Patient-reported outcomes such as the Forgotten Joint Score should not be used to compare procedures that are dissimilar in technique.

Patients Forget About Their Operated Knee More Following Arthroscopic Primary Repair of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Than Following Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To assess the extent to which patients forget their operative knee joint on a daily basis following arthroscopic primary repair as compared with reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) at short- to mid-term follow-up.

METHODS

For this retrospective study, all patients undergoing ACL surgery between May 2012 and May 2017 were identified. All patients were treated with the algorithm of undergoing arthroscopic primary repair for proximal tears and reconstruction for nonrepairable tears. Patients were contacted to complete the Forgotten Joint Score-12 questionnaire between 2 and 5 years following surgery. A greater score represents a more favorable outcome indicating the patient's ability to "forget" the joint in everyday life, whereas lower scores indicate a less-favorable outcome. Data were analyzed using independent t-tests and χ2 tests, and multiple linear regression analysis was performed to correct for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients completed the questionnaire (57%). Patients who underwent primary repair thought about their operated knee less when compared with those patients who underwent reconstruction (85.3 ± 14.2 vs 74.3 ± 23.3, P = .022). These differences were significantly greater in patients older than 30 years (85.3 ± 12.9 vs 62.6 ± 24.9, P = .007), male patients (85.0 ± 13.6 vs 72.5 ± 24.7, P = .037), and patients with a body mass index greater than 25 (85.9 ± 14.5 vs 64.7 ± 25.6, P = .009). After we corrected for potential confounders, the overall difference remained significant (P = .045).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data in this study, patients undergoing arthroscopic primary ACL repair can expect to have less daily awareness of their operated knee at short- to mid-term follow-up as compared with patients undergoing ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective comparative study, level III.

Connected orthopedics and trauma surgery: New perspectives

Information is everywhere in the surgeon's life. It can improve medical practice and allow for personalized care. To answer the question, "How should the surgeon be connected?" we must assess the role and limitations of digital information in daily practice, particularly through mobile applications or mHealth. These tools and their scope must be defined in order to measure their impact on our clinical practice. New regulations on medical data have been introduced imposing that privacy be maintained. Connected applications can assist the surgeon in making the diagnosis and deciding on the treatment. These tools are already being used widely. Decision algorithms based on machine learning are also a promising way to optimize patient care. Connected applications make the clinical follow-up easier by allowing more reliable, relevant and frequent data transmission. They also provide access to information and training, either early academic learning or continuing medical education. We must adapt to these new modes of learning. Thus, smartphones, tablets and digital applications now have a central role in modern orthopedic surgery. Surgeons have information, technical resources and storage for research data at their disposal, while patients can establish a link with their doctor (current or future) and find lay information about their condition.