Reporting and utilization of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures in orthopedic research and practice: a systematic review

Operative treatment of Mason Type III radial head fractures - A comparative analysis using PROMIS

Objectives

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of operatively treated Mason Type III radial head fractures. Additionally, this project seeks to assess efficacy of PROMIS in evaluating post-operative outcomes for this patient population.

Methods

A total of 143 patients who underwent operative treated Mason Type III radial head fractures were analyzed retrospectively. PROMIS physical function (PF), PROMIS upper extremity (UE), PROMIS pain interference (PI), demographic variables, and range of motion were collected and analyzed over 12-month follow-up.

Results

Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) was performed on 89 patients, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) was performed on 47 patients, and radial head excision was performed on 7 patients. Among the RHA patients, PROMIS PF, PI and UE demonstrated a change of -1.33 (p < 0.05), -1.48 (p < 0.05), and 2.23 (p < 0.05) respectively from injury to 12-months. Among the ORIF patients, PROMIS PF, PI and UE demonstrated a change of 3.22 (p < 0.05), -1.56 (p < 0.05), and 2.09 (p < 0.05) respectively from injury to 12-months. At the pre-operative and 12-month visits, the RHA group demonstrated lower PROMIS PF scores 34.75 vs 38.02 (p < 0.05) and 33.42 vs 41.24 (p < 0.05) respectively. Ther was no difference in PROMIS PI, UE, or elbow range of motion between the two groups at 6- or 12-month follow-up (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Comparing the RHA and ORIF groups, there was no difference in PROMIS PI or UE scores nor was there a clinically significant improvement at the 6- or 12-month mark. The ORIF group demonstrated improved PROMIS PF at all follow-up periods and did show a clinically significant improvement. Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) correlated only with PROMIS UE at 6- and 12- months for both groups.

Resilience Improves Patient-Reported Outcomes After Orthopaedic Trauma

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the relationship between patient resilience and patient-reported outcomes after orthopaedic trauma.

METHODS

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

SETTING

Single Level 1 Trauma Center.

PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA

Patients were selected based on completion of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) surveys 6 months after undergoing operative fracture fixation following orthopaedic trauma. Patients were excluded if they did not complete all PROMIS and BRS surveys.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

Resilience, measured by the BRS, was analyzed for its effect on patient-reported outcomes, measured by PROMIS Global Physical Health, Physical Function, Pain Interference, Global Mental Health, Depression, and Anxiety. Variables collected were demographics (age, gender, race, body mass index), injury severity score, and postoperative complications (nonunion, infection). All variables were analyzed with univariate for effect on all PROMIS scores. Variables with significance were included in multivariate analysis. Patients were then separated into high resilience (BRS >4.3) and low resilience (BRS <3.0) groups for additional analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 99 patients were included in the analysis. Most patients were male (53%) with an average age of 47 years. Postoperative BRS scores significantly correlated with PROMIS Global Physical Health, Pain Interference, Physical Function, Global Mental Health, Depression, and Anxiety ( P ≤ 0.001 for all scores) at 6 months after injury on both univariate and multivariate analyses. The high resilience group had significantly higher PROMIS Global Physical Health, Physical Function, and Global Mental Health scores and significantly lower PROMIS Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety scores ( P ≤ 0.001 for all scores).

CONCLUSIONS

Resilience in orthopaedic trauma has a positive association with patient outcomes at 6 months postoperatively. Patients with higher resilience report higher scores in all PROMIS categories regardless of injury severity. Future studies directed at increasing resilience may improve outcomes in patients who experience orthopaedic trauma.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Patient Reported Outcomes Following Triple Arthrodesis for Adult Acquired Flat Foot Deformity: Minimum Two Year Follow Up

The aim of this study is to analyze patient-reported outcomes following this procedure as well as any demographics that may confer prognostic capability. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients who underwent Triple Arthrodesis at our facility from 2014-2021. Patients were selected if they underwent an isolated triple arthrodesis. All cases included either a gastrocnemius recession versus a percutaneous tendo-achilles lengthening depending on the patient's Silverskiold examination. The electronic medical record was utilized to collect basic patient demographics, previous foot and ankle surgeries, hardware failures, additional procedures, and surgical complications. To evaluate outcomes, we compared patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) survey scores with the general population and preoperative versus postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Foot function index (FFI) scores and scores were utilized as a validation tool for our results. A total of 132 patients met the criteria for our study with a total of 50 participants completing the PROMIS and FFI surveys. The average time point at which the outcomes were collected was 5.50 y postoperatively, ranging from 1.65 to 7.57 y. The average PROMIS physical function was 38.35, pain interference was 61.52, and depression was 49.82 for this population. The mean FFI scores were 58.56 for pain, 60.07 for disability, and 48.07 for activity limitation. There was a significant decrease in preoperative and postoperative VAS scores from 5.4 to 2.55 (p < .001). Three patients experienced wound complications related to decreased sensation. Our results indicated that only PROMIS depression scores were within one standard deviation of the population mean following a triple arthrodesis procedure. PROMIS physical function and pain interference were both outside of one standard deviation for the population.

Factors Influencing PROMIS Scores and Patient Reported Outcomes Following Surgical Intervention of Isolated Lisfranc Injury: Minimum 2 Year Follow-up

Lisfranc injuries are rare but significant foot injuries, as they often result from polytrauma patients, and are often misdiagnosed, which further complicate their evaluation and contribute to their propensity towards disability. It is recommended that, on diagnosis, Lisfranc injuries be treated as soon as possible to decrease the risk of future chronic pain, disability, or osteoarthritis. Our study evaluated patients who completed the patient reported outcome measurement information systems (PROMIS) along with the foot function index (FFI) following operative fixation for Lisfranc injury. Fifty-one patients between 2010 and 2020 met inclusion criteria and were selected for this study, with completion. Utilizing the electronic medical record (EMR), patient charts were reviewed to obtain basic patient demographic information and comorbidities. Operative reports were reviewed to determine which procedure was performed for definitive fixation. Primary arthrodesis was associated with a significant decrease in complication rates (p = .025) when compared to ORIF. Females, arthrodesis, and procedures using a home run (HR) screw were independent risk factors for significantly higher reports of PROMIS pain interference. Arthrodesis also was associated with lower PROMIS pain interference scores. Arthrodesis and males exhibited higher scores in all FFI categories. Our results provide evidence that patient reported outcomes following Lisfranc surgery reported via PROMIS, FFI and VAS scores are independently influenced by patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgical variables. Analysis of potential associations between these patient characteristics and PROMIS and FFI scores provides evidence for physicians to manage patient expectations prior to operative treatment of a nonpolytraumatic Lisfranc injury.

Clinical Improvement After Lumbar Fusion: Using PROMIS to Assess Recovery Kinetics

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of a single institution cohort.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study is to identify features that predict delayed achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) following elective lumbar spine fusion using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) surveys.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Preoperative prediction of delayed recovery following lumbar spine fusion surgery is challenging. While many studies have examined factors impacting the achievement of MCID for patient-reported outcomes in similar cohorts, few studies have assessed predictors of early functional improvement.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing elective one-level posterior lumbar fusion for degenerative pathology. Patients were subdivided into two groups based on achievement of MCID for each respective PROMIS domain either before six months ("early responders") or after six months ("late responders") following surgical intervention. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine features associated with odds of achieving distribution-based MCID before or after six months follow up.

RESULTS

147 patients were included. The average age was 64.3±13.0 years. At final follow-up, 57.1% of patients attained MCID for PI and 72.8% for PF. However, 42 patients (49.4%) reached MCID for PI by six months, compared to 44 patients (41.1%) for PF. Patients with severe symptoms had the highest probability of attaining MCID for PI (OR 10.3; P =0.001) and PF (OR 10.4; P =0.001) Preoperative PROMIS symptomology did not predict early achievement of MCID for PI or PF. Patients who received concomitant iliac crest autograft during their lumbar fusion had increased odds of achieving MCID for PI (OR 8.56; P =0.001) before six months.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that the majority of patients achieved MCID following elective one-level lumbar spine fusion at long-term follow-up, although less than half achieved this clinical benchmark for each PROMIS metric by six months. We also found that preoperative impairment was not associated with when patients would achieve MCID. Further prospective investigations are warranted to characterize the trajectory of clinical improvement and identify the risk factors associated with poor outcomes more accurately.

Utility of Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System measures in predicting shoulder arthroplasty in patients with shoulder osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The decision to treat shoulder osteoarthritis (OA) definitively with shoulder arthroplasty (SA) is multifactorial, considering objective findings, subjective information, and patient goals. The first goal of this study was to determine if Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures correlated with patients with shoulder OA who underwent SA within 1 year. The second goal of this study was to determine if score cut-offs in PROMIS domains could further discriminate which shoulder OA patients underwent SA within 1 year.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study examined patients with a diagnosis of shoulder OA who consulted an orthopedic provider from November 1, 2020 to May 23, 2022, and recorded PROMIS measures in the domains of Physical Function, Depression, and/or Pain Interference. A surgical group was defined as patients who underwent SA within 1 year of the most recent PROMIS measures and the nonsurgical patients were defined as the control group. Mean PROMIS scores were compared between the surgical and control groups. Separate logistic regression models controlling for age, race, ethnicity, and comorbidity count were performed for each PROMIS domain as a 1) continuous variable, and then as 2) binary variable defined by PROMIS score cut-off points to determine which scores correlated with undergoing SA to further characterize the potential clinical utility of PROMIS score cut-offs in relating to undergoing SA.

RESULTS

The surgical group of 478 patients was older (68.2 vs. 63.8 years), more often of White race (82.6% vs. 70.9%), and less often of Hispanic Ethnicity (1.5% vs. 2.9%) than the control group of 3343 patients. Using optimal cut-offs in PROMIS scores, Pain Interference ≥63 (odds ratio [OR] = 2.97 (2.41-3.64), P < .001), Physical Function ≤39 (OR = 1.81 (95% confidence interval, 1.48-2.22), P < .001), and depression ≥49 (OR = 1.82 (95% confidence interval, 1.50-2.22), P < .001) were all found to correlate with undergoing SA within 1 year in multivariable logistic regressions.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrate that cut-off scores for PROMIS measures differentiated patients undergoing SA within 1 year. These cut-off scores may have clinical utility in aiding in decision-making regarding surgical candidates for SA. Further research is needed to validate these cut-off scores and determine how they relate to patient outcomes after SA.

The Oswestry Disability Index is reflective of pain interference and mobility in children

PURPOSE

The 9-item Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1a (ODI-9) has never been formally validated in children. Our primary purpose was to evaluate the ODI-9 using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pediatric Pain Interference (PI) and Mobility Computer Adapted Test (CAT) and Pain Catastrophizing Scale for Children (PCS-C) as anchors to determine concurrent validity in children.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed cross-sectional patient-reported outcomes data using a convenience sample of children referred to a tertiary pediatric orthopedic institution for any spine condition from April 2021 to April 2022. The ODI-9, PI, and Mobility were completed at clinic intake in 2,097 children (1453 girls, 644 boys) aged 14.2 ± 2.6 years (range 5-18 years) during the same visit. The ODI-9 was administered when children or caregivers responded "yes" to the presence of back pain. The PCS-C was administered only when pain intensity was rated as "very severe" or "the worst imaginable" on Item 1 of the ODI-9 (n = 51).

RESULTS

Average ODI-9 scores were 18.3% ± 14.8%, indicating minimal disability (ODI-9 ≤ 20%). Moderate, statistically and clinically significant associations were seen between the ODI-9 and PI (r = 0.68, p < 0.001), the ODI-9 and Mobility (r = - 0.68, p < 0.001), and the ODI-9 and PCS-C (r = 0.59, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Worse ODI-9 scores correlate with worse PROMIS PI scores, worse PROMIS Mobility scores, and worse PCS-C scores. The associations were moderate (PROMIS PI [r = 0.68], PROMIS Mobility [r = - 0.68], PCS-C [r = 0.59]).

Back pain and disability according to early onset scoliosis etiology in children younger than 10 years

PURPOSE

To determine caregiver-reported back pain prevalence, disability, pain interference, and associations with curve magnitude in early onset scoliosis (EOS) using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information Systems (PROMIS) measures.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective review was performed in children below 10 years of age according to EOS etiology. Caregiver-reported back pain prevalence, ODI, PROMIS Pain Interference, Mobility, and Anxiety measures, and curve magnitude were recorded as part of routine clinic appointments.

RESULTS

A total of 1212 patients with EOS (588 idiopathic, 295 congenital, 217 neuromuscular, 112 syndromic) ages 6.6 ± 2.7 were included; 23% had caregiver-reported back pain. Neuromuscular EOS patients had the highest prevalence of back pain (29%). ODI scores were higher in neuromuscular (48%) and syndromic (35%) patients than congenital (20%, p < 0.05) and idiopathic (16%, p < 0.01) patients. Neuromuscular patients also had higher PROMIS Pain Interference scores (53.3) compared to idiopathic (41.6, p < 0.001) and syndromic (45.0, p = 0.016) patients. A higher curve was associated with the presence of back pain (39° vs. 30°, p < 0.001) and had positive correlations with ODI scores (r = 0.38, p < 0.001) and PROMIS Pain Interference scores (r = 0.34, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Approximately one in five children with EOS under the age of 10 have caregiver-reported back pain, with the neuromuscular EOS type exhibiting higher pain prevalence, interference, and disability scores. Larger curve magnitude is associated with an increased prevalence of caregiver-reported back pain, increased disability, and increased pain interference.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 - case-control study.

Outcomes after Anatomic Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions Using Transtibial and Tibial Inlay Techniques

Surgical reconstruction is recommended for symptomatic posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) deficiency. While anatomic double-bundle PCL reconstruction (PCLR) has been reported to be associated with biomechanical and clinical advantages over other methods, there is still debate regarding the optimal technique for tibial positioning and fixation. Based on reported advantages and disadvantages, we employed two tibial fixation techniques, transtibial (TT) and tibial inlay (TI) for anatomic double-bundle PCLR with technique selection based on body mass index, comorbidities, and primary versus revision surgery. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes following PCLR utilizing either TT or TI techniques to validate relative advantages, disadvantages, and indications for each based on the review of prospectively collected registry data. For 37 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 26 underwent arthroscopic TT PCLR using all-soft- tissue allograft with suspensory fixation in the tibia and 11 patients underwent open TI PCLR using an allograft with calcaneal bone block and screw fixation in the tibia. There were no significant preoperative differences between cohorts. Success rates were 96% for TT and 91% for TI with all successful cases documented to be associated with good-to-excellent posterior stability and range of motion in the knee at the final follow-up. In addition, patient-reported outcome scores were within clinically meaningful ranges for pain, function, and mental health after PCLR in both cohorts, suggesting similarly favorable functional, social, and psychological outcomes. Patient-reported pain scores at 6 months postoperatively were significantly (p = 0.042) lower in the TT cohort, which was the only statistically significant difference in outcomes noted. The results of this study support the use of TT and TI techniques for double-bundle anatomic PCLR in restoring knee stability and patient function when used for the treatment of isolated and multiligamentous PCL injuries. The choice between tibial fixation methods for PCLR can be appropriately based on patient and injury characteristics that optimize respective advantages for each technique.

Impact of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Patient-reported Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of preoperative symptom duration (PSD) on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DSpond).

BACKGROUND

A prolonged duration of preoperative symptoms may implicate inferior long-term outcomes postsurgery. Prior studies of lumbar fusion recipients are limited by the inclusion of heterogeneous populations.

METHODS

A single-surgeon registry was retrospectively queried for privately insured patients who had undergone primary, elective, single-level MIS-TLIF for DSpond with a recorded symptom start date. Cohorts were formed by PSD: shorter duration (PSD <1 y) or greater duration (GD; PSD ≥1 y). PROMs evaluated included Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function, Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale-Back, Visual Analog Scale-Leg, and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire. The magnitude of PROM (∆PROM) improvement from preoperative baseline to 6 weeks and final follow-up (∆PROM-FF) were compared between cohorts. Intercohort achievement rates of a minimum clinically important difference in each PROM were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 133 patients included 85 patients with GD cohort. There were no significant differences in pre hoc demographics and perioperative characteristics between cohorts, as well as preoperative, 6-week, or final follow-up PROMs between cohorts. Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in all PROMs at 6 weeks and final follow-up (P ≤ 0.049, all). There were no significant intercohort differences demonstrated in minimum clinically important difference achievement rates, ∆PROM-6W, or ∆PROM-FF in any PROM.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of the symptom duration before MIS-TLIF for DSpond, patients demonstrate significant improvement in physical function, pain, disability, and mental health. Patients with a GD of preoperative symptoms did not report inferior scores in any PROM domain. Patients with a GD of preoperative symptoms did not suffer inferior rates of clinically meaningful improvement after surgical intervention. These findings should be considered when counseling patients before surgical intervention for DSpond.

Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression psychometrically underperforms compared to legacy measures and is poorly associated with postoperative functional outcomes in shoulder arthroplasty patients

Background

The purpose of this study was to investigate the associations between each mental health patient-reported outcome measure with postoperative functional outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty, and to compare psychometric properties of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression to the legacy (VR-12 Mental) patient-reported outcome measure.

Methods

Patients who underwent primary shoulder arthroplasty from July 2018 to February 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression and VR-12 Mental were administered preoperatively; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation were administered at 6-month and 1-year postoperatively. Rasch partial credit modeling analysis was used to compare psychometric properties of legacy versus patient-reported outcomes measurement information system instruments in assessing mental health.

Results

Ninety-three patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (n = 52), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (n = 39), or hemiarthroplasty (n = 2) were included. Preoperative VR-12 Mental scores were moderately associated with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons at 6-months (coefficient: 0.52, P = 0.026) and 1-year (coefficient: 0.65, P = 0.002), while preoperative patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression scores were not. Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression demonstrated significant floor effects (16%); VR-12 Mental demonstrated minimal floor and ceiling effects (1.1% for both). VR-12 Mental demonstrated broader coverage of mental outlook on Rasch modeling than patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression and had adequate model fit after one round of reiterative item elimination.

Discussion

Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system depression was poorly associated with postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, demonstrated significant floor effects, and had limited coverage of mental health on Rasch modeling with reiterative elimination.

Level of Evidence

IV.

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.

Challenges and Opportunities for the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopaedic Pediatric and Sports Medicine Surgery

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential tools in assessing treatment response, informing clinical decision making, driving healthcare policy, and providing important prognostic data regarding patient health status change. These tools become essential in orthopaedic disciplines, such as pediatrics and sports medicine, given the diversity of patient populations and procedures. However, the creation and routine administration of standard PROMs alone do not suffice to appropriately facilitate the aforementioned functions. Indeed, both the interpretation and optimal application of PROMs are essential to provide to achieve greatest clinical benefit. Contemporary developments and technologies surrounding PROMs may help augment this benefit, including the application of artificial intelligence, novel PROM structure with improved interpretability and validity, and PROM delivery methods that provide increased access to patients resulting in greater compliance and data acquisition yields. Despite these exciting innovations, several challenges remain in this realm that must be addressed to continue to advance the clinical usefulness and subsequent benefit of PROMs. This review will highlight the opportunities and challenges surrounding contemporary PROM use in the orthopaedic subspecialties of pediatrics and sports medicine.

Do You PROMIS (Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System)? Physical Function and Pain Interference Scores After Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty

Background

Physical function and pain outcomes vary after arthroplasty. We investigated differences in postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI) scores for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). We aimed to identify preoperative factors that predict postoperative PROMIS scores.

Methods

Patients who underwent TKA and THA from 2014-2020 were eligible. Preoperative variables including demographics, comorbidities, and pain scores were obtained from the medical record. Patients completed surveys measuring postoperative PF and PI. Descriptive statistics and separate linear regression models for each anatomical location were performed to examine factors predicting postoperative PROMIS PF and PI scores.

Results

Surveys were completed by 2411 patients (19.5% response rate). Unadjusted mean PF postoperative scores were 47.2 for TKA and 48.8 for THA. Preoperative predictors of lower PF included female sex; body mass index and comorbidities for TKA and THA; and age, tobacco use, and non-White race for THA. Mean PI scores were 47.9 for THA and 49.0 for TKA. Preoperative predictors of increased PI included non-White race and increased body mass index for TKA and THA; higher preoperative pain for TKA; and female sex and increased comorbidity for THA.

Conclusions

Postoperative PROMIS scores were similar for TKA and THA, with THA having slightly higher PF and lower PI scores. Regression models using preoperative variables showed similar performance for TKA compared with THA. These findings suggest areas for future development of clinical decision support tools.

Non-operative Treatment of Mason Type I Radial Head Fractures: A Comparative Analysis Using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of Mason type I radial head fractures. This information will help to provide physicians with a critical decision-making tool when considering non-operative intervention and evaluate Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) as a potentially valuable measure to track outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 527 patients undergoing non-operative intervention. Demographic information, physical exam measurements, patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), and Pain Interference (PI) scores were analyzed over 12 months.

RESULTS

At the initial outpatient post-injury visit (within one week of injury), the average PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression were 42.04 (SD: 6.3), 35.31 (SD: 7.3), 59.18 (SD: 9.2), and 48.68 (SD: 6.8), respectively. The average change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores from the time of injury to six weeks were -0.23 (p=0.7), 1.43 (p=0.03), -2.1 (p=0.01), and -0.99 (p=0.1). The average change in PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores from the time of injury to six months was -0.56 (p=0.56), 1.84 (p<0.001), -1.84 (p<0.001), and -0.13 (p=0.68). Among patients initially reporting "not acceptable" on PASS and reporting "acceptable" at the six-month visit, the average PROMIS PF, UE, PI, and Depression scores were 42.14, 38.91, 56.91, and 47.51 respectively. This represents an average difference of 1.11 (p=0.07), 2.82 (p<0.01), -1.19 (p=0.04), and -1.7 (p=0.01) respectively.

CONCLUSION

PROMIS UE and PI significantly improved among Mason I radial head fractures treated non-operatively at both six-week and six-month follow-up points but did not meet the mean clinically important difference (MCID) PROMIS PF did not significantly differ between the time of injury, six-week or six-month follow-up points. Only PROMIS UE correlated with PASS at six-week and six-month follow-up. Among patients who improved from negative to positive responses on PASS, PROMIS UE, and PI significantly improved.

Can Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Measures Estimate High Impact Chronic Pain After Total Joint Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

High impact chronic pain (HICP) is not typically measured following orthopedic surgeries, but has a substantial negative impact on postoperative quality of life. This analysis determined which Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures accurately estimate HICP status following total joint arthroplasty (TJA).

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of a hip and knee TJA cohort. HICP status was determined by two items from the Graded Chronic Pain Scale-Revised. The cohort (n = 2,400) consisted of 47.5% hip (n = 1,142) and 52.5% knee TJA (n = 1,258). For total hip arthroplasty (THA), 53.7% were women (n = 615), 48.6% were 65 years or older (n = 557), 72.5% completed the survey more than 24 months after first surgery (n = 831), and 9.9% had HICP (n = 114). For total knee arthroplasty (TKA), 54.3% were women (n = 687), 59.3% were 65 years or older (n = 750), 72.3% survey completed the survey more than 24 months after first surgery (n = 915), and 11.5% had HICP (n = 145). Included PROMIS measures were pain interference, physical function, anxiety, and sleep disturbance. First, discriminant function analysis determined PROMIS measure contribution to HICP status. Then, area under the curve (AUC) calculated the accuracy of PROMIS measures to estimate HICP status. Influences of sociodemographic and surgical characteristics on AUC were explored in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Results for TKA and THA were similar so they are presented collectively for the sake of brevity. Mean differences were identified for all PROMIS measures for those with HICP (All P values < 0.01). Pain interference (β = 0.934) and sleep disturbance (β = 0.154) were independently correlated with HICP status in discriminant function analyses. The AUC (95% CIs) for HICP were as follows: pain interference (.952-.973), physical function (.921-.949), sleep (.780-.838), and anxiety (.687-.757). Sensitivity analyses revealed little change in AUC and HICP cutoff scores for PROMIS pain interference and physical function.

CONCLUSION

Two PROMIS measures commonly administered as standard of care for orthopedics, pain interference, and physical function, can be used to estimate HICP status for THA and TKA, thereby refining assessment of TJA outcomes.

Comparison of the PROMIS and iHOT-12 in Determining Satisfaction Levels After Hip Arthroscopy for FAIS

Background

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has not been fully evaluated for outcomes assessment after hip arthroscopy to correct femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) subscales with the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) to define patients with 3 unique substantial clinical benefit (SCB) scores-patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1 year after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. We hypothesized that the iHOT-12 would be more accurate than the PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales in identifying these 3 patient groups.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

Methods

We reviewed the records of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAIS at 3 centers from January 2019 through June 2021 and had 1-year clinical and radiographic follow-up data. Patients completed the iHOT-12, PROMIS-PF, and PROMIS-PI on initial assessment and at 1 year (±30 days) postoperatively. Postoperative satisfaction was reported on an 11-category scale with anchors defined as "0% satisfied" and "100% satisfied." Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed to determine the absolute SCB values for the iHOT-12 and PROMIS subscales that would most accurately identify those patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction. Area under the curve (AUC) values and 95% CIs for the 3 instruments were compared.

Results

Included were 163 patients (111 [68%] women and 52 [32%] men), with a mean age of 26.1 years. Corresponding absolute SCB scores for patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction were as follows: iHOT-12, 68.4, 72.1, 74.7; PROMIS-PF, 45, 47.7, 49.9; and PROMIS-PI, 55.9, 52.4, 51.9. The AUC ranged between 0.67 and 0.82, with overlapping 95% CIs indicating a minimal difference in accuracy between the 3 instruments. Sensitivity and specificity values ranged between 0.61 and 0.82.

Conclusion

The PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales were as accurate as the iHOT-12 in defining absolute SCB scores for patients reporting ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1-year follow-up after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

Factors Associated With Poor Patient-Reported Outcomes in Isolated Gastrocnemius Recession for Heel Pain

Background

Gastrocnemius recession is commonly performed for a variety of pathologies of the foot and ankle, yet studies characterizing risk factors associated with patient-reported outcomes are limited. In this cohort study, patient outcomes were compared against the general population for PROMIS scores with correlation analysis comparing demographics and comorbidities. Our primary goal in this study is to identify risk factors associated with poor patient-reported outcomes following isolated gastrocnemius recession for patients with plantar fasciitis or insertional Achilles tendinopathy.

Methods

A total of 189 patients met inclusion criteria. The open Strayer method was preferred. However, if the myotendinous junction could not be adequately visualized without expanding the excision, then a Baumann procedure was performed. The decision between the two did not depend on preoperative contracture. Patient demographics and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were obtained via the electronic medical record. Telephone interviews were completed to collect postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and Foot Function Index (FFI) scores. The data were analyzed using the type 3 SS analysis of variance test to identify individual patient factors associated with reduced PROMIS, FFI, and VAS scores.

Results

No demographic variables were found to be significantly associated with postoperative complications. Patients who reported tobacco use at the time of surgery had significantly decreased postoperative PROMIS physical function (P = .01), PROMIS pain interference (P < .05), total FFI scores (P < .0001), and each individual FFI component score. Patients undergoing their first foot and ankle surgeries reported numerous significant postoperative outcomes, including decreased PROMIS pain interference (P = .03), higher PROMIS depression (P = .04), and lower FFI pain scores (P = .04). Hypertension was significantly associated with an increased FFI disability score (P = .03) and, along with body mass index (BMI) >30 (P < .05) and peripheral neuropathy (P = .03), significantly higher FFI activity limitation scores (P = .01). Pre- and postoperative VAS scores demonstrated improvement in patient-reported pain from a mean of 5.53 to 2.11, respectively (P < .001).

Conclusion

We found in this cohort that numerous patient factors were independently associated with differences in patient-reported outcomes following a Strayer gastrocnemius recession performed for plantar fasciitis or insertional Achilles tendinopathy. These factors include, but are not limited to, tobacco use, prior foot and ankle surgeries, and BMI. This study strengthens previous reports demonstrating the efficacy of isolated gastrocnemius recession and elucidates variables that may affect patient-reported outcomes.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

There Is Substantial Variation in Rehabilitation Protocols Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Survey of 46 American Orthopaedic Surgeons

PURPOSE

To identify the clinical practice preferences of orthopaedic surgeons regarding anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) rehabilitation through a survey of members of the Arthroscopy Association of North American (AANA) and the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM).

METHODS

An online survey was distributed to members of AANA and AOSSM between November 2020 and September 2021. Participants reported on their clinical preferences for ACLR protocol development and patient selection, use of technology in ACLR recovery and rehabilitation, and preferences for advancing through multiple phases of the rehabilitative process.

RESULTS

Responses from 46 orthopaedic surgeons were analyzed. Patient-reported outcome measures were not found to be utilized often at various phases of the perioperative period. Thirty-eight (82.6%) participants reported utilization of postoperative bracing. There was no consensus on when participants allow their patients to advance through rehabilitation, but most report waiting 3 to 4 months for advancement to jogging/lateral movement, 6 to 8 months for return to noncontact sport, and 9 months of more for return to unrestricted sport. Many participants utilize functional and strength testing with associated limb symmetry indices to determine patient readiness to return to sport, with 18, 26, and 25 participants reporting use of functional testing and 28, 26, and 27 participants reporting use of strength testing at the return to jogging/lateral movements, noncontact return to sport, and unrestricted return-to-sport phases, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an insight into the rehabilitative protocols and modalities utilized for ACLR by orthopaedic surgeons in practice across the United States. There is notably substantial variation in rehabilitative patterns and preferences, particularly with regards to what constitutes criteria for progressing patients through the phases of returning to unrestricted sport. Additionally, our findings show that while many surgeons believe that quantitative assessment technology could be beneficial in decision-making for returning patients to sport, there are still many barriers that stand in the way of its implementation into clinical practice.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Postoperative rehabilitative protocols after ACLR vary by surgeon.

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.

Psychometric Properties of the Turkish Version of the JHand for the Patient-Oriented Outcome Measure for Patients with Hand and Elbow Disorders

The JHand is an easy-to-understand questionnaire that includes questions that exclude hand dominance. It was developed to evaluate patients with hand and elbow disorders. However, JHand has not been translated and validated in the Turkish language. The aim of this study is to investigate the psychometric properties of the culturally adapted Turkish version of the JHand for Turkish patients. A total of 262 patients were included in the study. JHand, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire, and Hand20 were used to evaluate patients. Internal consistency and test-retest analyses were applied to determine the reliability of the Turkish version of the JHand. Confirmatory factor analysis and similar scale validity were used to determine its validity. The Turkish version of the JHand showed high levels of internal consistency and excellent test-retest reliability (Cronbach α = 0.907, ICC = 0.923). The model fit indices of the Turkish version of the JHand had good and acceptable fit with reference values. Statistically positive and very strong correlations were found between JHand and DASH (r = .825, p < .001) as well as the JHand and Hand20 (r = .846, p < .001). The Turkish version of the JHand had excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability as well as a high level of validity.

Wound closure with a mesh and liquid tissue adhesive (Dermabond Prineo) system in pediatric spine surgery: a prospective single-center cohort study incorporating parent-reported outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

Wound healing can be challenging in children undergoing spine surgery for neurological conditions due to a high risk of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage and wound infection. In adults, use of the Dermabond Prineo (DP) skin closure system, which consists of both tissue adhesive glue and a self-adhesive mesh, for wound closure of medium-length surgical incisions has been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficiency and cosmetic outcome of DP for wound closure in extra- and intradural pediatric neurological spine surgery.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, 47 children underwent 50 spine procedures using DP for wound closure between 2018 and 2022 at a single institution. Patient demographic and surgical data were collected. The primary outcome was revision surgery for wound healing disorders, while secondary outcomes were infections, minor wound healing disorders, and both physician and parental satisfaction (parent-reported outcome measures [PROMs]) at last follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 50 spinal (45 intra- and 5 extradural) interventions, 1 patient (2%) underwent revision surgery for a cutaneous CSF fistula and pseudomeningocele. Minor wound healing disorders occurred after 16 surgeries, which did not require surgical wound revision and resolved completely. No allergic reactions to DP or surgical site infections within 30 days were observed. The parents and the medical team described wound care as significantly facilitated since wound dressing changes were not needed. Three families (6.4%) encountered difficulties in wound care, and 46 (97.9%) were satisfied with DP. The cosmetic outcome based on PROMs was excellent, with a mean score of 8 (IQR 2) on a scale from 1 to 10. At long-term follow-up, a mean of 11.3 ± 10.7 months after surgery, physicians rated the cosmetic outcome on the visual analog scale (median score 9, IQR 1) and Hollander scale (median score 6, IQR 1). The outcomes were similar among the different pathologies and age groups and did not differ in patients with and without syndromic malformations.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of DP is simple, enables good patient comfort, facilitates both professional and parental wound care, and leads to excellent cosmetic results. DP possibly aids in the reduction of postoperative CSF leakage and infections after pediatric neurological spine surgery.

PROMIS Utilization in Pediatric Orthopaedics: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

The lack of a common patient-reported outcome metric used among the orthopaedic population is a problem that has been previously identified by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed by the National Institute of Health with the goal of creating a precise and efficient measurement tool for patient-reported symptoms, functioning, and health-related quality of life to be used in clinical research. A study summarizing its use in the pediatric orthopaedic population has not been previously performed.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of Ovid Medline, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 2010 to August 2021. There were 1961 unique citations included after the removal of 1756 duplicates. After initial screening, 183 studies were screened under full-text review leaving a final number of 51 studies included in this scoping review.

RESULTS

Pediatric PROMIS studies were grouped by body part or sub-speciality: "Hand and Upper Extremity" (25.5%, n=13), "Sports" (23.5%, n=12), "Spine" (13.7%, n=7), "Trauma" (13.7%, n=7), "General Pediatric Orthopaedics" (11.8%, n=6), "Lower Extremity" (9.8%, n=5), and "Orthopaedic Oncology" (2%, n=1). An increase in studies utilizing PROMIS was seen throughout the study period with only 3 studies published from 2013 to 2016 to 39 in 2020 and 2021 alone. The 3 most frequently used pediatric PROMIS domains were Pain Interference (76.5%, n=39/51), Mobility (60.8%, n=31/51), and Upper Extremity (54.9%, n=28/51). 64.3% (n=9/14) of the included studies which reported on the floor effects of Pain Interference exhibited a significant floor effect. In all, 77.8% (n=7/9) of the included studies which reported on ceiling effects of Upper Extremity exhibited a significant ceiling effect.

CONCLUSION

The use of PROMIS increased significantly since the first publication in 2013 suggesting orthopaedic providers have increasingly utilized PROMIS in their day-to-day practice as an outcome measure. Ceiling and floor effects were prominent in several of the included domains (Pain Interference and Upper Extremity). Overall, PROMIS measures are efficient, reliable, and effective to use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

What Is the Clinical Benefit of Common Orthopaedic Procedures as Assessed by the PROMIS Versus Other Validated Outcomes Tools?

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), are increasingly used to measure healthcare value. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) is a metric that helps clinicians determine whether a statistically detectable improvement in a PROM after surgical care is likely to be large enough to be important to a patient or to justify an intervention that carries risk and cost. There are two major categories of MCID calculation methods, anchor-based and distribution-based. This variability, coupled with heterogeneous surgical cohorts used for existing MCID values, limits their application to clinical care.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In our study, we sought (1) to determine MCID thresholds and attainment percentages for PROMIS after common orthopaedic procedures using distribution-based methods, (2) to use anchor-based MCID values from published studies as a comparison, and (3) to compare MCID attainment percentages using PROMIS scores to other validated outcomes tools such as the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) and Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

METHODS

This was a retrospective study at two academic medical centers and three community hospitals. The inclusion criteria for this study were patients who were age 18 years or older and who underwent elective THA for osteoarthritis, TKA for osteoarthritis, one-level posterior lumbar fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis or spondylolisthesis, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis or rotator cuff arthropathy, arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, or arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. This yielded 14,003 patients. Patients undergoing revision operations or surgery for nondegenerative pathologies and patients without preoperative PROMs assessments were excluded, leaving 9925 patients who completed preoperative PROMIS assessments and 9478 who completed other preoperative validated outcomes tools (HOOS, KOOS, numerical rating scale for leg pain, numerical rating scale for back pain, and QuickDASH). Approximately 66% (6529 of 9925) of patients had postoperative PROMIS scores (Physical Function, Mental Health, Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, and Upper Extremity) and were included for analysis. PROMIS scores are population normalized with a mean score of 50 ± 10, with most scores falling between 30 to 70. Approximately 74% (7007 of 9478) of patients had postoperative historical assessment scores and were included for analysis. The proportion who reached the MCID was calculated for each procedure cohort at 6 months of follow-up using distribution-based MCID methods, which included a fraction of the SD (1/2 or 1/3 SD) and minimum detectable change (MDC) using statistical significance (such as the MDC 90 from p < 0.1). Previously published anchor-based MCID thresholds from similar procedure cohorts and analogous PROMs were used to calculate the proportion reaching MCID.

RESULTS

Within a given distribution-based method, MCID thresholds for PROMIS assessments were similar across multiple procedures. The MCID threshold ranged between 3.4 and 4.5 points across all procedures using the 1/2 SD method. Except for meniscectomy (3.5 points), the anchor-based PROMIS MCID thresholds (range 4.5 to 8.1 points) were higher than the SD distribution-based MCID values (2.3 to 4.5 points). The difference in MCID thresholds based on the calculation method led to a similar trend in MCID attainment. Using THA as an example, MCID attainment using PROMIS was achieved by 76% of patients using an anchor-based threshold of 7.9 points. However, 82% of THA patients attained MCID using the MDC 95 method (6.1 points), and 88% reached MCID using the 1/2 SD method (3.9 points). Using the HOOS metric (scaled from 0 to 100), 86% of THA patients reached the anchor-based MCID threshold (17.5 points). However, 91% of THA patients attained the MCID using the MDC 90 method (12.5 points), and 93% reached MCID using the 1/2 SD method (8.4 points). In general, the proportion of patients reaching MCID was lower for PROMIS than for other validated outcomes tools; for example, with the 1/2 SD method, 72% of patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy reached the MCID on PROMIS Physical Function compared with 86% on KOOS.

CONCLUSION

MCID calculations can provide clinical correlation for PROM scores interpretation. The PROMIS form is increasingly used because of its generalizability across diagnoses. However, we found lower proportions of MCID attainment using PROMIS scores compared with historical PROMs. By using historical proportions of attainment on common orthopaedic procedures and a spectrum of MCID calculation techniques, the PROMIS MCID benchmarks are realizable for common orthopaedic procedures. For clinical practices that routinely collect PROMIS scores in the clinical setting, these results can be used by individual surgeons to evaluate personal practice trends and by healthcare systems to quantify whether clinical care initiatives result in meaningful differences. Furthermore, these MCID thresholds can be used by researchers conducting retrospective outcomes research with PROMIS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Sleep disturbance, dyspnea, and anxiety following total joint arthroplasty: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains for sleep disturbance, anxiety, and dyspnea have been under-reported for total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The aims of this study were to report postoperative differences for these domains based on TJA location and chronic pain state. We also investigated whether these domains were associated with physical function and pain interference outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational study of patients who underwent hip, knee, or shoulder TJA (primary and revision surgeries) at a single academic tertiary referral center. A subset of these patients completed an email-based survey for chronic pain grade (Chronic Pain Grade Scale-Revised) and sleep disturbance, anxiety, dyspnea, physical function, and pain interference (PROMIS short forms). Pre-operative and operative data were extracted from the electronic health record. Data analysis investigated PROMIS domains for differences in TJA location and chronic pain grade. Hierarchical linear regression determined associations of these domains with physical function and pain interference.

RESULTS

A total of 2638 individuals provided informed consent and completed the email survey. In the ANOVA models for sleep disturbance, anxiety, and dyspnea, there was no location by chronic pain grade interaction (p > 0.05) and no difference based on TJA location (p > 0.05). There were differences for chronic pain grade (p < 0.01). The poorest postoperative outcome score for each domain was associated with high impact chronic pain. Furthermore, sleep disturbance and dyspnea had the strongest associations with physical function and pain interference (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Sleep disturbance, anxiety, and dyspnea did not vary based on TJA location, but were associated with postoperative chronic pain grade. Sleep disturbance and dyspnea were strongly associated with commonly reported outcomes of physical function and pain interference. These findings provide guidance for those interested in expanding TJA outcome assessment to include sleep disturbance, anxiety, and/or dyspnea.

Linking Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form and PROMIS Physical Function

INTRODUCTION

Linking scores on patient-reported outcome measures can enable data aggregation for research, clinical care, and quality. We aimed to link scores on the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) and the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF).

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted from 2017 to 2020 evaluating patients with hip osteoarthritis who received routine clinical care from an orthopaedic surgeon. Our sample included 3,382 unique patients with 7,369 pairs of HOOS-PS and PROMIS PF measures completed at a single nonsurgical, preoperative, or postoperative time point. We included one randomly selected time point of scores for each patient in our linking analysis sample. We compared the accuracy of linking using four methods, including equipercentile and item response theory-based approaches.

RESULTS

PROMIS PF and HOOS-PS scores were strongly correlated ( r = -0.827 for raw HOOS-PS scores and r = 0.820 for summary HOOS-PS scores). The assumptions were met for equipercentile and item response theory approaches to linking. We selected the item response theory-based Stocking-Lord approach as the optimal crosswalk and estimated item parameters for the HOOS-PS items on the PROMIS metric. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated overall robustness of the crosswalk estimates in nonsurgical, preoperative, and postoperative patients.

CONCLUSION

These crosswalks can be used to convert scores between HOOS-PS and PROMIS PF metric at the group level, which can be valuable for data aggregation. Conversion of individual patient-level data is not recommended secondary to increased risk of error.

Cemented Patellar Implant Malposition: A Non-Issue for the Painful Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Non-optimal patellofemoral relationships may influence treatment decisions during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We performed this study to determine whether patellar implant malposition or patellar tilt is associated with inferior patient-reported outcome scores or patient satisfaction after primary TKA.

METHODS

We identified 396 TKA patients (439 knees) from an institutional registry who had undergone patellar resurfacing, with preoperative and 6-week postoperative radiographs available, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) completed at least 1 year after surgery (mean 505 days). Preoperative patient demographic characteristics, patient-reported expectations, National Institutes of Health - Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements Instrument Systems global health, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, and University of California Los Angeles activity scores were compared between 60 TKAs performed with non-optimal patellofemoral relationships (36 patellar implant malposition, 24 patellar tilt) and 379 TKAs performed with optimal patellar implant placement.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the 2 cohorts regarding demographic features, preoperative radiographic disease severity, expectations, and PROMs; or postoperative tibiofemoral component alignment, PROMs, and patient-reported satisfaction (P = .48). Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement improved similarly (P = .62) for patients with optimal resurfacing (48.5-77.6 points) and non-optimal resurfacing (47.7-76.6 points). A similar proportion of optimal and suboptimal resurfaced patients reported being satisfied with their TKA (92.7% vs 88.1%, P = .29).

CONCLUSION

Although suboptimal patellofemoral relationships may prompt treatment considerations during revision TKA, the data obtained from this study do not suggest that patellar implant malposition or patellar tilt independently contribute to postoperative pain, functional limitation, or dissatisfaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

This is a level III, retrospective cohort study.

Value in acute care surgery, part 2: Defining and measuring quality outcomes

ABSTRACT

The prior article in this series delved into measuring cost in acute care surgery, and this subsequent work explains in detail how quality is measured. Specifically, objective quality is based on outcome measures, both from administrative and clinical registry databases from a multitude of sources. Risk stratification is key in comparing similar populations across diseases and procedures. Importantly, a move toward focusing on subjective outcomes like patient-reported outcomes measures and financial well-being are vital to evolving surgical quality measures for the 21st century.

Can Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Measures Differentiate Patients Who Will Undergo Hip and Knee Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) can be used to monitor patients in population-health-based programs. However, it is unknown which measures are most appropriate to differentiate patients who will undergo hip or knee total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in a cohort of patients with osteoarthritis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of new patients consulting for treatment from November 17, 2017 to April 20, 2020 (cases: hip: n = 157, knee: n = 112; randomly selected nonsurgical controls: hip: n = 314, knee: n = 224) was extracted from the electronic health record. We recorded demographics, comorbidity, and PROMIS scores for 8 domains (physical function, pain interference, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and fatigue). We performed descriptive statistics to characterize the cohorts and baseline PROMIS scores and conducted logistic regression models to determine which PROMIS domains differentiated patients undergoing hip and knee TJA.

RESULTS

In univariate comparisons of PROMIS domains, the hip and knee surgical cohorts differed from controls in physical function (P < .01), pain interference (P < .01), and ability to participate in social roles and activities (P < .02). In logistic regression models informed by univariate analyses, PROMIS physical function was the only PROMIS measure to differentiate undergoing surgery in both hip and knee cohorts (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

PROMIS physical function can differentiate TJA cases from nonsurgical controls in both hip and knee patients. These findings have implications for considering which PROMIS measures to administer in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis.

The patient-reported outcomes measurement information systems (PROMIS®) physical function and its derivative measures in adults: a systematic review of content validity

PURPOSE

This study aims to systematically review and critically appraise the content validity of the adult versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) item bank and its derivative measures in any adult population.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in October 2021 for studies on measurement properties of PROMIS-PF measures in an adult population. Studies were included if the study described the development of a PROMIS-PF measure or investigated its relevance, comprehensiveness, or comprehensibility. Assessment of the methodological quality of eligible studies, rating of results, and summarizing evidence was performed following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for assessing content validity. A modified GRADE approach was used to determine the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Three development studies and eight studies on the content validity of one or more of the PROMIS-PF measures were identified. The methodological quality of most studies was rated doubtful. There was low to high level evidence for sufficient relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of most PROMIS-PF measures for healthy seniors and various disease populations. We found low to moderate level evidence for insufficient relevance of PROMIS-PF measures for patients with conditions that affected only one body part, and insufficient comprehensibility of the PROMIS-PF measures for minority elderly.

CONCLUSION

Most PROMIS-PF measures demonstrate sufficient content validity in healthy seniors and various disease populations. However, the quality of this evidence is generally low to moderate, due to limitations in the methodological quality of the studies.

There are more things in physical function and pain: a systematic review on physical, mental and social health within the orthopedic fracture population using PROMIS

Background

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System (PROMIS®) is more and more extensively being used in medical literature in patients with an orthopedic fracture. Yet, many articles studied heterogeneous groups with chronic orthopedic disorders in which fracture patients were included as well. At this moment, there is no systematic overview of the exact use of PROMIS measures in the orthopedic fracture population. Therefore this review aimed to provide an overview of the PROMIS health domains physical health, mental health and social health in patients suffering an orthopedic fracture.

Methods

This systematic review was documented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled Trials, CINAHL and Google Scholar in December 2020 using a combination of MeSH terms and specific index terms related to orthopedic fractures and PROMIS questionnaires. Inclusion criteria were available full text articles that were describing the use of any PROMIS questionnaires in both the adult and pediatric extremity fracture population.

Results

We included 51 relevant articles of which most were observational studies (n = 47, 92.2%). A single fracture population was included in 47 studies of which 9 involved ankle fractures (9/51; 17.6%), followed by humeral fractures (8/51; 15.7%), tibia fractures (6/51; 11.8%) and radial -or ulnar fractures (5/51; 9.8%). PROMIS Physical Function (n = 32, 32/51 = 62.7%) and PROMIS Pain Interference (n = 21, 21/51 = 41.2%) were most frequently used questionnaires. PROMIS measures concerning social (n = 5/51 = 9.8%) and mental health (10/51 = 19.6%) were much less often used as outcome measures in the fracture population. A gradually increasing use of PROMIS questionnaires in the orthopedic fracture population was seen since 2017.

Conclusion

Many different PROMIS measures on multiple domains are available and used in previous articles with orthopedic fracture patients. With physical function and pain interference as most popular PROMIS measures, it is important to emphasize that other health-domains such as mental and social health can also be essential to fracture patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00440-3.

Streamlining Trauma Research Evaluation With Advanced Measurement (STREAM) Study: Implementation of the PROMIS Toolbox Within an Orthopaedic Trauma Clinical Trials Consortium

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level II.

Minimum Clinically Important Difference: A Metric That Matters in the Age of Patient-Reported Outcomes

➤

As the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is increasingly utilized in orthopaedic research and clinical practice, there is not a consensus regarding the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) calculation.

➤

The varied MCID calculation methods can lead to a range of possible values, which limits the translatability of research efforts.

➤

The completion rate and follow-up period also influence MCID values and should be reported alongside study results.

Construct Validity and Item Response Theory Analysis of the PROMIS-29 v2.0 in Recipients of Lumbar Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Observational cohort design involving measurement property assessment.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess construct validity through hypothesis testing and to examine reliability and discrimination of the PROMIS-29 v2.0 using item response theory (IRT) analyses.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29.0 version 2.0 includes 28 questions for the seven domains of Physical function, Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Sleep disturbance, Social role, and Pain interference, and one item related to pain intensity. To date, the tool has not been tested for construct validity for selected concepts, nor has it been evaluated using IRT in a population of spine surgery recipients.

METHODS

Using the Quality Outcomes Dataset lumbar registry, we evaluated the construct validity of the PROMIS-29 v2.0 against pain intensity measures for back and leg, the Oswestry Disability Index, the EQ5D 3L-visual analog scale (quality of life) and proxy measures of activities, mobility and self-care. IRT was used to test PROMIS-29 v2.0 assumptions and fit.

RESULTS

The sample included 652 surgery recipients (mean age = 60.1, SD = 14.0) who had a high level of baseline disability. Hypothesis testing confirmed direction and magnitude of correlation between the PROMIS and legacy measures in 10 of the 12 hypotheses. IRT identified three misfit items, but otherwise adequate scale reliability and unidimensionality.

CONCLUSION

The PROMIS-29 v2.0 measures several different constructs pertinent to a patient's health and recovery during spine surgery. We feel that the PROMIS-29 v2.0 tool is a useful and effective outcome measure for populations who receive spine surgery.Level of Evidence: 4.

Check-in Phone Calls Six Weeks and Six Months After Musculoskeletal Specialty Care

Health organizations want to measure patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) longitudinally. Two medical assistants called people selectively at 6 weeks and routinely at 6 months to obtain PROMs as part of routine musculoskeletal specialty care. Only 47% of patients (123 of 263) were reached by phone at 6 weeks and 41% (246 of 594) at 6 months. Spanish speakers were more likely to answer. Eighty-nine percent of people reached at 6 weeks and 76% reached at 6 months were willing to complete PROMs. Speaking Spanish, older age, and fewer symptoms of depression were associated with completing PROMs when reached by phone at 6 weeks. Women and Spanish-speaking patients were more likely to participate at 6 months. The observation that most people do not participate in longitudinal PROM measurement in a system that devotes notable resources in the setting of musculoskeletal specialty care-with some variation by psychosocial factors-suggests that longitudinal PROM measurement may be infeasible. Future work can explore alternative measures of the value of care that account for the large percentage of people that deprioritize care after a single specialty visit.

Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures to characterise health status for patients seeking care from an orthopaedic provider: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Characterise the health status of patients newly consulting an orthopaedic specialist across eight clinical subspecialties.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

18 orthopaedic clinics, including 8 subspecialties (14 ambulatory and 4 hospital based) within an academic health system.

PARTICIPANTS

14 910 patients consulting an orthopaedic specialist for a new patient consultation who completed baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures associated with their appointment from 17 November 2017 to 13 May 2019. Patients were aged 55.72±5.8 years old, and 61.3% were female and 79.3% were Caucasian and 13.4% were black or African American. Patients who did not complete PROMIS measures or cancelled their appointment were excluded from the study.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

PROMIS domains of physical function, pain interference, pain intensity, depression, anxiety, fatigue, sleep disturbance and the ability to participate in social roles.

RESULTS

Mean PROMIS scores for physical function were (38.1±9.2), pain interference (58.9±8.1), pain intensity (4.6±2.5), depression (47.9±8.9), anxiety (49.9±9.5), fatigue (50.5±10.3), sleep disturbance (51.1±9.8) and ability to participate in social roles (49.1±10.3) for the entire cohort. Across the clinical subspecialties, neurosurgery, spine and trauma patients were most profoundly affected across almost all domains and patients consulting with a hand specialist reported the least limitations or symptoms across domains. There was a moderate, negative correlation between pain interference and physical functioning (r=-0.59) and low correlations between pain interference with anxiety (r=0.36), depression (r=0.39) as well as physical function and anxiety (r=-0.32) and depression(r=-0.30) and sleep (r=-0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

We directly compared clinically meaningful PROMIS domains across eight orthopaedic subspecialties, which would not have been possible with legacy measures alone. These results support PROMIS's utility as a common metric to assess and compare patient health status across multiple orthopaedic subspecialties.

Evaluation of PROMIS Preference Scoring System (PROPr) in Patients Undergoing Hemodialysis or Kidney Transplant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

A preference-based health utility score (PROPr) can be calculated using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System domain scores. We assessed the construct validity of PROPr among patients treated with KRT (hemodialysis or kidney transplant).

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We performed a secondary analysis of data collected in multicenter, cross-sectional studies of adults treated with KRT, recruited between April 2016 to March 2020 in Toronto, Canada. All participants provided informed consent. The outcome was the PROPr score. Coadministered outcome variables included the Short-Form Six-Domain (SF-6D) and EuroQol Five-Domain Five-Level (EQ-5D-5L) scores. Socioeconomic and clinical variables included age, sex, diabetes, eGFR, serum albumin, hemoglobin, KRT, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Construct validity was assessed through correlations between PROPr and SF-6D or EQ-5D-5L, and associations between PROPr and other exposure variables. Health-condition impact estimates (coefficients for health conditions compared with a referent category, e.g., dialysis versus kidney transplant) were calculated using multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of the 524 participants was 57 (17) years, 58% were male, and 45% were White. Median (interquartile range) score was 0.39 (0.24-0.58) for PROPr, 0.69 (0.58-0.86) for SF-6D, and 0.85 (0.70-0.91) for EQ-5D-5L. Large correlations were observed between PROPr versus SF-6D (0.79; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.76 to 0.82) and EQ-5D-5L (0.71; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.75). Both PROPr and the other utility indices demonstrated health-condition impact in the expected direction. For example, the estimate for PROPr was -0.17 (95% CI, -0.13 to -0.21) for dialysis (versus kidney transplant), -0.05 (95% CI, -0.11 to 0.01; P=0.08) for kidney transplant recipients with an eGFR of <45 versus ≥45 ml/min per 1.73 m², and -0.28 (95% CI, -0.22 to -0.33) for moderate/severe versus no/mild depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the validity of PROPr among patients treated with KRT.

Can PROMIS measures be used to create subgroups for patients seeking orthopaedic care?

Aims

Patient-reported outcome measures have become an important part of routine care. The aim of this study was to determine if Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures can be used to create patient subgroups for individuals seeking orthopaedic care.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of patients from Duke University Department of Orthopaedic Surgery clinics (14 ambulatory and four hospital-based). There were two separate cohorts recruited by convenience sampling (i.e. patients were included in the analysis only if they completed PROMIS measures during a new patient visit). Cohort #1 (n = 12,141; December 2017 to December 2018,) included PROMIS short forms for eight domains (Physical Function, Pain Interference, Pain Intensity, Depression, Anxiety, Sleep Quality, Participation in Social Roles, and Fatigue) and Cohort #2 (n = 4,638; January 2019 to August 2019) included PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing instruments for four domains (Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Sleep Quality). Cluster analysis (K-means method) empirically derived subgroups and subgroup differences in clinical and sociodemographic factors were identified with one-way analysis of variance.

Results

Cluster analysis yielded four subgroups with similar clinical characteristics in Cohort #1 and #2. The subgroups were: 1) Normal Function: within normal limits in Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Sleep Quality; 2) Mild Impairment: mild deficits in Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Sleep Quality but with Depression within normal limits; 3) Impaired Function, Not Distressed: moderate deficits in Physical Function and Pain Interference, but within normal limits for Depression and Sleep Quality; and 4) Impaired Function, Distressed: moderate (Physical Function, Pain Interference, and Sleep Quality) and mild (Depression) deficits.

Conclusion

These findings suggest orthopaedic patient subgroups differing in physical function, pain, and psychosocial distress can be created from as few as four different PROMIS measures. Longitudinal research is necessary to determine whether these subgroups have prognostic validity.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):493–502.

Electronic health record-integrated approach for collection of patient-reported outcome measures: a retrospective evaluation

Background

The integration of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into clinical care presents many challenges for health systems. PROMs provide quantitative data regarding patient-reported health status. However, the most effective model for collecting PROMs has not been established. Therefore the purpose of this study is to report the development and preliminary evaluation of the standardized collection of PROMs within a department of orthopedic surgery at a large academic health center.

Methods

We utilized the Users’ Guide to Integrating Patient-Reported Outcomes in Electronic Health Records by Gensheimer et al., 2018 as a framework to describe the development of PROMs collection initiative. We framed our initiative by operationalizing the three aspects of PROM collection development: Planning, Selection, and Engagement. Next, we performed a preliminary evaluation of our initiative by assessing the response rate of patients completing PROMs (no. of PROMs completed/no. of PROMs administered) across the entire department (18 clinics), ambulatory clinics only (14 clinics), and hospital-based clinics only (4 clinics). Lastly, we reported on the mean response rates for the top 5 and bottom 5 orthopaedic providers to describe the variability across providers.

Results

We described the development of a fully-integrated, population health based implementation strategy leveraging the existing resources of our local EHR to maximize clinical utility of PROMs and routine collection. We collected a large volume of PROMs over a 13 month period (n = 10,951) across 18 clinical sites, 7 clinical specialties and over 100 providers. The response rates varied across the department, ranging from 29 to 42%, depending on active status for the portal to the electronic health record (MyChart). The highest single provider mean response rate was 52%, and the lowest provider rate was 13%. Rates were similar between hospital-based (26%) and ambulatory clinics (29%).

Conclusions

We found that our standardized PROMs collection initiative, informed by Gensheimer et al., achieved scope and scale, but faced challenges in achieving a high response rate commensurate with existing literature. However, most studies reported a targeted recruitment strategy within a narrow clinical population. Further research is needed to elucidate the trade-off between scalability and response rates in PROM collection initiatives.

Can a robot help a surgeon to predict a good total knee arthroplasty?

AIMS

Neither a surgeon's intraoperative impression nor the parameters of computer navigation have been shown to be predictive of the outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this study was to determine whether a surgeon, with robotic assistance, can predict the outcome as assessed using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for pain (KPS), one year postoperatively, and establish what factors correlate with poor KOOS scores in a well-aligned and balanced TKA.

METHODS

A total of 134 consecutive patients who underwent TKA using a dynamic ligament tensioning robotic system with a tibia first resection technique and a cruciate sacrificing ultracongruent TKA system were enrolled into a prospective study. Each TKA was graded based on the final mediolateral ligament balance at 10° and 90° of flexion: 1) < 1 mm difference in the thickness of the tibial insert and that which was planned (n = 75); 2) < 1 mm difference (n = 26); 3) between 1 mm to 2 mm difference (n = 26); and 4) > 2 mm difference (n = 7). The mean one-year KPS score for each grade of TKA was compared and the likelihood of achieving an KPS score of > 90 was calculated. Finally, the factors associated with lower KPS despite achieving a high-grade TKA (grade A and B) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Patients with a grade of A or B TKA had significantly higher mean one-year KPS scores compared with those with C or D grades (p = 0.031). There was no difference in KPS scores in grade A or B TKAs, but 33% of these patients did not have a KPS score of > 90. While there was no correlation with age, sex, preoperative deformity, and preoperative KOOS and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical scores, patients with a KPS score of < 90, despite a grade A or B TKA, had lower PROMIS mental health scores compared with those with KPS scores of > 90 (54.1 vs 50.8; p = 0.043). Patients with grade A and B TKAs with KPS > 90 were significantly more likely to respond with "my expectations were too low", and with "the knee is performing better than expected" compared with patients with these grades of TKA who had a KPS score of < 90 (40% vs 22%; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

A TKA balanced with robotic assistance to within 1 mm of difference between the medial and lateral sides in both flexion and extension had a higher KPS score one year postoperatively. Despite accurate ligament balance information, a robotic system could not guarantee excellent pain relief. Patient expectations and mental status also significantly affected the perceived success of TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6 Supple A):67-73.

Reporting Complications in Spinal Surgery-a Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Many efforts are expended to improve health care quality in the surgical treatment of spinal conditions. However, the prevalence of reporting complications in spinal surgeries is highly heterogeneous, which is partially due to the lack of a universal and comprehensive system.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed in 5 international and indexed spine journals from January to December 2020. All clinical studies that had surgical procedures in any spinal region were classified according to level of evidence, study design, category of spinal condition, and primary outcome. The prevalence and quality of complication reporting were evaluated through a checklist.

RESULTS

Of 455 articles screened, complications were reported in 64.2% (292 articles). A significant higher prevalence of reports was observed in randomized compared with nonrandomized studies (P < 0.05). In 89 articles, at least 1 classification was used to report complications, with 12 different classification systems employed in the total sample. Timing to record complications was as follows: 47 (16.1%) articles reported complications at 30 days, 31 (10.6%) reported complications at 90 days, and 88 (30.1%) reported complications during all follow-ups. In 126 (43.1%) articles, complications were not mentioned.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost one-third of spine surgical studies did not report complications in their results despite reporting clinical outcomes. The evidence quality of the study was directly related with the reporting of complications. A high heterogeneity regarding complication reporting was seen in the literature.