Orthopaedic registries with patient-reported outcome measures

Artemisinic acid attenuates osteoclast formation and titanium particle-induced osteolysis via inhibition of RANKL-induced ROS accumulation and MAPK and NF-κB signaling pathways

Periprosthetic osteolysis (PPO) is the most common cause of joint arthroplasty failure. Its progression involves both biological and mechanical factors. Osteoclastogenesis induced by wear from debris-cell interactions, ultimately leading to excessive bone erosion, is considered the primary cause of PPO; therefore, targeting osteoclasts is a promising treatment approach. Currently available drugs have various side effects and limitations. Artemisinic acid (ArA) is a sesquiterpene isolated from the traditional herb Artemisia annua L. that has various pharmacological effects, such as antimalarial, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant activities. Therefore, this study was aimed at investigating the effect of ArA on osteoclast formation and bone resorption function in vitro, as well as wear particle-induced osteolysis in vivo, and to explore its molecular mechanism of action. Here, we report that ArA inhibits RANKL-stimulated osteoclast formation and function. Mechanistically, ArA suppresses intracellular reactive oxygen species levels by activating the antioxidant response via nuclear factor erythroid-2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) pathway upregulation. It also inhibits the mitogen-activated kinases (MAPK) and nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) pathways, as well as the transcription and expression of NFATc1 and c-Fos. In vivo experiments demonstrated that ArA reduces osteoclast formation and alleviates titanium particle-induced calvarial osteolysis. Collectively, our study highlights that ArA, with its osteoprotective and antioxidant effects, is a promising therapeutic agent for preventing and treating PPO and other osteoclast-mediated osteolytic diseases.

Reconstruction of the elbow with distal humerus endoprosthetic replacement after tumor resection: a systematic review of the literature and institutional case series

BACKGROUND

Distal humerus replacement (DHR) is a modular endoprosthesis mainly used for bone reconstruction after resection of primary or metastatic bone lesions. Studies on DHR failure rates and postoperative functional outcomes are scarce. We sought to assess implant survival, modes of failure, and functional outcomes in patients undergoing DHR for oncologic indications.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed and Embase databases was performed. PRISMA guidelines were followed for this manuscript. Our study was registered on PROSPERO (457,260). Quality appraisal of included studies was conducted using the STROBE checklist. Prosthetic failure was assessed using the Henderson classification for megaprosthetic failures. We additionally performed a retrospective review of patients treated with a DHR for oncologic indications at a large tertiary care academic center. Weighted means were calculated to pool data.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with a total of 162 patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean follow-up was 3.7 years (range, 1.66-8 years). Henderson type 2 failures (aseptic loosening) were the most common mode of failure, occurring in 12% of cases (range, 0%-33%). Five-year implant survival was 72% (range, 49%-93.7%). Mean postoperative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was 81.1 (range, 74-84.3). In our institutional case series, 2 out of 5 patients had DHR revision for periprosthetic fracture and aseptic loosening at 16 and 27 months after surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Distal humerus replacement is a successful reconstruction strategy for tumors of the distal humerus, with high implant survival and good to excellent functional outcomes.

Can prediction models for hospital readmission be improved by incorporating patient-reported outcome measures? A systematic review and narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

To investigate the roles, challenges, and implications of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in predicting the risk of hospital readmissions.

METHODS

We systematically searched four bibliometric databases for peer-reviewed studies published in English between 1 January 2000 and 15 June 2023 and used validated PROMs to predict readmission risks for adult populations. Reported studies were analysed and narratively synthesised in accordance with the CHARMS and PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Of the 2858 abstracts reviewed, 23 studies met predefined eligibility criteria, representing diverse geographic regions and medical specialties. Among those, 19 identified the positive contributions of PROMs in predicting readmission risks. Seven studies utilised generic PROMs exclusively, eleven used generic and condition-specific PROMs, while 5 focussed solely on condition-specific PROMs. Logistic regression was the most used modelling approach, with 13 studies aiming at predicting 30-day all-cause readmission risks. The c-statistic, ranging from 0.54 to 0.84, was reported in 22/23 studies as a measure of model discrimination. Nine studies reported model calibration in addition to c-statistic. Thirteen studies detailed their approaches to dealing with missing data.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the potential of PROMs to enhance predictive accuracy in readmission models, while acknowledging the diversity in data collection methods, readmission definitions, and model evaluation approaches. Recognizing that PROMs serve various purposes beyond readmission reduction, our study supports routine data collection and strategic integration of PROMs in healthcare practices to improve patient outcomes. To facilitate comparative analysis and broaden the use of PROMs in the prediction framework, it is imperative to consider the methodological aspects involved.

Patients' experience on pain outcomes after hip arthroplasty: insights from an information tool based on registry data

BACKGROUND

Arthroplasty registries are rarely used to inform encounters between clinician and patient. This study is part of a larger one which aimed to develop an information tool allowing both to benefit from previous patients' experience after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study focuses on generating the information tool specifically for pain outcomes.

METHODS

Data from the Geneva Arthroplasty Registry (GAR) about patients receiving a primary elective THA between 1996 and 2019 was used. Selected outcomes were identified from patient and surgeon surveys: pain walking, climbing stairs, night pain, pain interference, and pain medication. Clusters of patients with homogeneous outcomes at 1, 5, and 10 years postoperatively were generated based on selected predictors evaluated preoperatively using conditional inference trees (CITs).

RESULTS

Data from 6,836 THAs were analysed and 14 CITs generated with 17 predictors found significant (p < 0.05). Baseline WOMAC pain score, SF-12 self-rated health (SRH), number of comorbidities, SF-12 mental component score, and body mass index (BMI) were the most common predictors. Outcome levels varied markedly by clusters whilst predictors changed at different time points for the same outcome. For example, 79% of patients with good to excellent SRH and less than moderate preoperative night pain reported absence of night pain at 1 year after THA; in contrast, for those with fair/poor SHR this figure was 50%. Also, clusters of patients with homogeneous levels of night pain at 1 year were generated based on SRH, Charnley, WOMAC night and pain scores, whilst those at 10 years were based on BMI alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The information tool generated under this study can provide prospective patients and clinicians with valuable and understandable information about the experiences of "patients like them" regarding their pain outcomes.

Subjective Shoulder Value for Sport Is a Simple, Reliable, and Valid Score to Assess Shoulder Function in Athletes

PURPOSE

To validate the subjective shoulder value for sport (SSV-Sport) by measuring its correlation with existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and defining its psychometric properties.

METHODS

Between May 2021 and May 2022, we established 2 patient groups. Group 1 included those (1) aged 18 years or older, who were (2) consulting for the first time for any shoulder condition, (3) regularly participated in sports, and were capable of accessing a questionnaire independently. There were asked to rate their SSV and SSV-Sport at admission and 2 weeks later; they also were asked to answer a questionnaire including other PROMS. Group 2 comprised patients who had (1) undergone shoulder stabilization surgery and had (2) a minimum follow-up period of 6 months.

RESULTS

For the shoulder disability patients (group 1, n = 62), there was a strong and significant correlation between SSV-Sport and other PROMs: Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Sport (r = 0.84), Walch-Duplay (r = 0.65), Rowe (r = 0.74), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (r = 0.78), and SSV (r = 0.75) (P = .0001). The SSV-Sport was reliable at baseline and 2 weeks after (0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.85-0.94), and was responsive to change (P < .001). For the anterior instability patients (group 2, n = 83), SSV was on average 50 points greater than SSV-Sport (29.2 vs 79.4, P < .001) for preoperative values. In both groups, the values of SSV were constantly and significantly higher than the values of SSV-Sport (81.9 ± 21.3 vs 54.8 ± 30.9; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The SSV-Sport is an easily administered, reliable, responsive, and valid measure of shoulder function in athletes that is highly correlated with other PROMs. SSV-Sport is better adapted than SSV to quantify pre- and postoperative shoulder deficiency in athletes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, cohort study (diagnosis).

Gender health gap pre- and post-joint arthroplasty: identifying affected patient-reported health domains

BACKGROUND

As patient-reported outcomes (PROs) gain prominence in hip and knee arthroplasty (HA and KA), studies indicate PRO variations between genders. Research on the specific health domains particularly impacted is lacking. Hence, we aim to quantify the gender health gap in PROs for HA/KA patients, differentiating between general health, health-related quality of life (HrQoL), physical functioning, pain, fatigue, and depression.

METHODS

The study included 3,693 HA patients (1,627 men, 2,066 women) and 3,110 KA patients (1,430 men, 1,680 women) receiving surgery between 2020 to 2021 in nine German hospitals, followed up until March 2022. Questionnaires used were: EQ-VAS, EQ-5D-5L, HOOS-PS, KOOS-PS, PROMIS-F-SF, PROMIS-D-SF, and a joint-specific numeric pain scale. PROs at admission, discharge, 12-months post-surgery, and the change from admission to 12-months (PRO-improvement) were compared by gender, tested for differences, and assessed using multivariate linear regressions. To enable comparability, PROs were transformed into z-scores (standard deviations from the mean).

RESULTS

Observed differences between genders were small in all health domains and differences reduced over time. Men reported significantly better health versus women pre-HA (KA), with a difference of 0.252 (0.224) standard deviations from the mean for pain, 0.353 (0.243) for fatigue (PROMIS-F-SF), 0.327 (0.310) for depression (PROMIS-D-SF), 0.336 (0.273) for functionality (H/KOOS-PS), 0.177 (0.186) for general health (EQ-VAS) and 0.266 (0.196) for HrQoL (EQ-5D-5L). At discharge, the gender health gap reduced and even disappeared for some health dimensions since women improved in health to a greater extent than men. No gender health gap was observed in most PRO-improvements and at month 12.

CONCLUSIONS

Men experiencing slightly better health than women in all health dimensions before surgery while experiencing similar health benefits 12-months post-surgery, might be an indicator of men receiving surgery inappropriately early, women unnecessarily late or both. As studies often investigate the PRO-improvement, they miss pre-surgery gender differences, which could be an important target for improvement initiatives in patient-centric care. Moreover, future research on cutoffs for meaningful between-group PRO differences per measurement time would aid the interpretation of gender health disparities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Register for Clinical Trials, DRKS00019916, 26 November 2019.

Patient-reported outcomes the first thirty days after fast-track primary total hip arthroplasty. A prospective cohort study using a web-based registration tool for postoperative follow-up

INTRODUCTION

The documentation on patient reported outcomes the first weeks at home following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is sparse. Length of hospital stay after THA is substantially reduced. Therefore, knowledge on whether patients are managing their own postoperative rehabilitation early after discharge is important, in order to give the patients realistic preoperative information, to modify expectations and enable patients to monitor their own rehabilitation process.

METHODS

Eighty-two THA patients were included in a prospective cohort study. Patient-reported outcomes were collected twice a week thirty days postoperatively using a web-based registration tool. Numeric rating scales (0-10) for pain, function, and quality of life, EQ-5D, and the use of opioids were registered. Four weeks postoperatively a telephone interview were conducted. Pain, EQ5D and hip specific physical function score (HOOS-PS) were recorded preoperatively, at three- and twelve-months follow-up.

RESULTS

Pain was maintained the first days after hospital discharge. From day 0 to day 30, pain decreased from 4.0 (SD 2.23) to 2.3 (SD 1.75), function improved from 4.4 (SD 2.06) to 7 (SD 1.57), quality of life improved from 6.3 (SD 2.69) to 7.8 (SD 1.47), and EQ-5D improved from 0.4 to (SD 0.27) to 0.7 (SD 0.14). After 30 days, 32% still used opioids. All patients completed the web-registration. Pain, EQ-5D and HOOS-PS improved substantially from preoperatively to twelve months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Fast-track THA patients can expect continued postoperative pain and impaired quality of life the first week at home, before gradually improvement. After thirty days, 32 % of the patients still used opioids.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Challenging the Status Quo: Debunking the Necessity of 5-Year to 10-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

In the current shift toward value-based healthcare, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become essential to assess the effectiveness of medical interventions. However, elucidation of the optimal timeframe for PROMs evaluation remains crucial. This study aimed to (1) determine the proportion of patients who experienced clinically meaningful improvements in PROMs scores at each follow-up visit after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and (2) calculate and apply the clinical relevance ratio (CRR) for these long-term PROM collections postoperatively.

METHODS

A total of 12 independent studies reporting THA (n = 8 studies) and TKA (n = 4 studies) postoperative PROM data with up to 10 years of follow-up in Europe or the United States were aggregated. A distribution-based minimal clinically important difference threshold and CRR were used to determine which patients had clinically meaningful improvements in PROMs at 1, 5, and 10 years.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients who had clinically meaningful improvements in PROM scores stabilized after 1 year following both THA and TKA. Overall, the CRR decreased over time for all PROMs, with the CRR beginning to decrease at 1-year follow-up, bringing into question the robustness and clinical relevance of long-term PROMs data.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study challenges the utility of requiring PROMs with a minimum follow-up of 2 years for THA and TKA. Research efforts should be focused on registries evaluating implant survivorship at longer-term follow-up, while PROMs should be better assessed up to 1-year follow-up. Reconsidering the long-term PROMs assessment would lead to more efficient and cost-effective research in orthopedic outcomes, without compromising data quality.

Differences in Outcomes Between Initial Responders and Subsequent Responders to Health Questionnaires for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: An Australian Tertiary Institutional Registry Study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) questionnaires in national arthroplasty registries often have low response rates leading to questions about data reliability. In Australia, the SMART (St. Vincent's Melbourne Arthroplasty Outcomes) registry captures all elective total hip (THA) and total knee (TKA) arthroplasty patients with an approximate 98% response rate for preoperative and 12-month PROM scores. This high response rate is due to dedicated registry staff following up patients who do not initially respond (subsequent responders). This study compared initial responders to subsequent responders to find differences in 12-month PROM outcomes for THA and TKA.

METHODS

All elective THA and TKA patients for osteoarthritis from 2012 to 2021 captured by the SMART registry were included. In total, 1,333 THA and 1,340 TKA patients were included. The PROM scores were assessed using the Veterans-RAND 12 (VR12) and Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaires. The primary outcome was differences in mean 12-month PROM scores between initial and subsequent responders.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics and PROM scores were similar between initial and subsequent responders. However, 12-month PROM scores varied significantly. The adjusted mean difference showed that for the WOMAC pain score, subsequent responders scored 3.4 points higher in the THA cohort and 7.4 points higher in the TKA cohort compared to initial responders. Significant differences were also found in other WOMAC and VR12 scores for both THA and TKA cohorts at the 12-month timepoint.

CONCLUSION

This study found that significant differences in PROM outcomes postsurgery occurred in THA and TKA patients based on response to PROM questionnaires, suggesting that loss to follow-up in PROM outcomes should not be treated as missing completely at random (MCAR).

Population-Based Applications and Analytics Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

The intersection of big data and artificial intelligence (AI) has resulted in advances in numerous areas, including machine learning, computer vision, and natural language processing. Although there are many potentially transformative applications of AI in health care, including precision medicine, this industry has been slow to adopt these technologies. At the same time, the operations of health care have historically been system-directed and physician-directed rather than patient-centered. The application of AI to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which provide insight into patient-centered health outcomes, could steer research and healthcare delivery toward decisions that optimize outcomes important to patients. Historically, PROMs have only been collected within research registries. However, the increasing availability of PROMs within electronic health records has led to their inclusion in big data ecosystems, where they can inform or be informed by other data elements. The use of big data to analyze PROMs can help establish norms, evaluate data distribution, and determine proportions of patients achieving change or threshold standards. This information can be used for benchmarking, risk adjustment, predictive modeling, and ultimately improving the health of individuals and populations.

A Systematic Review of Data Collection by National Joint Replacement Registries: What Opportunities Exist for Enhanced Data Collection and Analysis?

BACKGROUND

National joint replacement registries assist surgeons and hospitals with guiding decision making and quality of care. The data points collected are essential to interpret and analyze data and to understand confounding variables and other sources of bias, which can impair retrospective observational research. The aim of this study was to review all national joint replacement registries to assess what data points are recorded, and in what manner, for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) so that improvements can be made to enhance data collection, interpretation, and analysis.

METHODS

All national registries were identified through Internet and publication search and contacted to invite participation. Data collection forms for both primary and revision THA and TKA were requested. Data collected were entered into an Excel spreadsheet.

RESULTS

The study group for primary and revision THA consisted of 28 national registries, with 26 agreeing to participate. The study group for primary TKA consisted of 27 national registries, with 24 agreeing to participate. Patient identification details were recorded uniformly. Only a minority recorded patient details beyond American Society of Anesthesiologists and body mass index. Most registries did not record surgeon variables: who actually performed or assisted the procedure and their level of training. There was variation in the degree of detail recorded for diagnosis, mostly regarding secondary causes of osteoarthritis and fracture. The details regarding case complexity were limited. Half recorded previous operations, and fewer recorded bone defects. The location of knee arthritis, preoperative limb alignment, and deformities were rarely recorded. Surgical approach and technological adjuncts were routinely collected, but few other details on the surgical technique were recorded. Implant details and fixation were uniformly collected, although a minority recorded specific details, including cement antibiotic or cementing technique. It was uncommon to record whether additional or adjunctive procedures were concurrently performed. Approximately half the registries lacked a revision specific form. The majority recorded reoperations in addition to revision procedures. Patient, surgeon, case, and postoperative details were recorded similar to primary procedures. There was variation in the degree of details recorded for the reasons underlying the revision +/- reoperation, with most recording greater detail for infection and fracture. Many included details on case complexity and bone defects, including the severity, classification, and how the defect was managed. The majority recorded the specific revision procedure that was performed (total or partial), the fixation used, and the components removed or revised. Other specific aspects of fixation including acetabular screws, cone or sleeve use, stems, and augments were less commonly recorded.

CONCLUSION

Substantial data are recorded by all registries, although each one is different. Data solicited lack many patient factors, surgeon variables, case complexity, and surgical techniques. Separate revision forms are not universal, and many registries do not record reoperation procedures, specific causes of revision, and the revision construct.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Simple foot an ankle value: a simple evaluation correlated to the existing PROMs

PURPOSE

The SFAV (Simple Foot and Ankle Value) consists in asking patients how they rate their joint function on the day of the examination, as a percentage of that of a normal joint (0-100% scale with 100% being normal). The main objective was to validate the SFAV by determining its correlation with validated foot and ankle function scores.

METHODS

This was a prospective study. 90 patients were included in three groups: patients 16 to 54 years old with an acute or subacute ankle pathology (foot/ankle trauma patient group), patients more than 55 years old with ankle or foot osteoarthritis (foot/ankle degeneration patient group), and adults of any age without foot or ankle pathology (control group). A self-administered questionnaire with the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society, The European Foot and Ankle Society, the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score, the Visual Analogic Scale, and the SFAV was given at three different timepoints (enrollment, preoperative visit, and 6-month postoperative visit) to the patients. The validity of the SFAV was investigated by determining its correlation with the existing foot and ankle PROMs using Spearman's correlation; test-retest reliability, the responsiveness to change, and the discriminative ability of the SFAV were also analyzed. The significance threshold was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

The SFAV was significantly correlated with the AOFAS, EFAS, and FAOS at all tested time points, with all p values below 0.033. SFAV scoring was reliable over time, as p values resulting from the comparison between initial and preoperative SFAV were all above the significance threshold. SFAV scoring was responsive to change, based on the comparison between pre- and postoperative SFAV (p < 0.05). Like for the AOFAS, EFAS, and FAOS, SFAV provides good discrimination between a healthy subject and a patient. The control group scores and initial consultation scores of the pooled patient's groups were statistically correlated (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The SFAV is a valid outcome measure correlated with the AOFAS, EFAS, FAOS, and VAS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level of evidence III.

Evaluating the Use of PROMs in Paediatric Orthopaedic Registries

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide structured information on the patient's health experience and facilitate shared clinical decision-making. Registries that collect PROMs generate essential information about the clinical course and efficacy of interventions. Whilst PROMs are increasingly being used in adult orthopaedic registries, their use in paediatric orthopaedic registries is not well known. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the frequency and scope of registries that collect PROMs in paediatric orthopaedic patient groups. In July 2023, six databases were systematically searched to identify studies that collected PROMs using a registry amongst patients aged under 18 years with orthopaedic diagnoses. Of 3190 identified articles, 128 unique registries were identified. Three were exclusively paediatric, 27 were majority paediatric, and the remainder included a minority of paediatric patients. One hundred and twenty-eight registries collected 72 different PROMs, and 58% of these PROMs were not validated for a paediatric population. The largest group of orthopaedic registries collected PROMs on knee ligament injuries (21%). There are few reported dedicated orthopaedic registries collecting PROMs in paediatric populations. The majority of PROMs collected amongst paediatric populations by orthopaedic registries are not validated for patients under the age of 18 years. The use of non-validated PROMs by registries greatly impedes their utility and impact. Dedicated orthopaedic registries collecting paediatric-validated PROMs are needed to increase health knowledge, improve decision-making between patients and healthcare providers, and optimise orthopaedic management.

Research Trends of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopedic Medical Practices: A Bibliometric and Visualized Study

Background and Objectives: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), also known as self-report measures, are critical tools for evaluating health outcomes by gathering information directly from patients without external interpretation. There has been a growing trend in the number of publications focusing on PROMs in orthopedic-related research. This study aims to identify the most valuable publications, influential journals, leading researchers, and core countries in this field using bibliometric analysis, providing researchers with an understanding of the current state and future trends of PROMs in orthopedic research. Materials and Methods: All PROMs in orthopedic-related publications from 1991 to 2022 were obtained from the WoSCC database. R software (version 4.2.2), VOSviewer (version 1.6.17), and Microsoft Excel (version 2303) were used for the bibliometric and visual analysis. Results: A total of 2273 publication records were found from 1991 to 2022. The results indicated that the United States (US) has made significant contributions to orthopedic-related PROMs. The majority of active research institutions are located in the US. J ORTHOP RES has published the most articles. J BONE JOINT SURG AM has the highest total citations. Conclusions: Our study provides a valuable reference for further exploration of the application of PROMs in orthopedics. PROMs have emerged as an increasingly popular area of research within the field of orthopedics, both in clinical practice and academic research. We conducted a bibliometric analysis in terms of journals, authors, countries, and institutions in this field. Additionally, we analyzed the potentialities and advantages of using PROMs in orthopedic research. There is an increasing trend towards using network-based or short message service (SMS)-based electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) in orthopedic medical practices. It is anticipated that the role of PROMs in psychological and mental health research and telemedicine will continue to grow in importance.

Using Presurgical Biopsychosocial Features to Develop an Advanced Clinical Decision-Making Support Tool for Predicting Recovery Trajectories in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty: Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), 10% to 20% of patients report dissatisfaction with procedural outcomes. There is growing recognition that postsurgical satisfaction is shaped not only by the quality of surgery but also by psychological and social factors. Surprisingly, information on the psychological and social determinants of surgical outcomes is rarely collected before surgery. A comprehensive collection of biopsychosocial information could assist clinicians in making recommendations in relation to rehabilitation, particularly if there is robust evidence to support the ability of presurgical constructs to predict postsurgical outcomes. Clinical decision support tools can help identify factors influencing patient outcomes and support the provision of interventions or services that can be tailored to meet individuals' needs. However, despite their potential clinical benefit, the application of such tools remains limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop a clinical decision tool that will assist with patient stratification and more precisely targeted clinical decision-making regarding prehabilitation and rehabilitation for TKA, based on the identified individual biopsychosocial needs.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, all participants provided written or electronic consent before study commencement. Patient-completed questionnaires captured information related to a broad range of biopsychosocial parameters during the month preceding TKA. These included demographic factors (sex, age, and rurality), psychological factors (mood status, pain catastrophizing, resilience, and committed action), quality of life, social support, lifestyle factors, and knee symptoms. Physical measures assessing mobility, balance, and functional lower body strength were performed via video calls with patients in their home. Information related to preexisting health issues and concomitant medications was derived from hospital medical records. Patient recovery outcomes were assessed 3 months after the surgical procedure and included quality of life, patient-reported knee symptoms, satisfaction with the surgical procedure, and mood status. Machine learning data analysis techniques will be applied to determine which presurgery parameters have the strongest power for predicting patient recovery following total knee replacement. On the basis of these analyses, a predictive model will be developed. Predictive models will undergo internal validation, and Bayesian analysis will be applied to provide additional metrics regarding prediction accuracy.

RESULTS

Patient recruitment and data collection commenced in November 2019 and was completed in June 2022. A total of 1050 patients who underwent TKA were enrolled in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings will facilitate the development of the first comprehensive biopsychosocial prediction tool, which has the potential to objectively predict a patient's individual recovery outcomes following TKA once selected by an orthopedic surgeon to undergo TKA. If successful, the tool could also inform the evolution rehabilitation services, such that factors in addition to physical performance can be addressed and have the potential to further enhance patient recovery and satisfaction.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/48801.

Lower limb post-traumatic osteomyelitis: a systematic review of clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to examine the patient-reported outcomes of patients presenting with post-traumatic osteomyelitis (PTOM) of the lower limb over the past 15 years. This period was chosen to reflect modern treatment principles and increased centralisation of care.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of the relevant databases (PubMed, Ovid Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library) was conducted to identify studies published between January 2006 and July 2021 reporting series of greater than 10 patients with PTOM of the tibia or femur at the site of a previous fracture. Studies reporting septic non-union were excluded.

RESULTS

Sixteen eligible studies were identified and included in the final report. Remission of infection was achieved in 93.2% of cases (range 70-100%), whilst amputation was reported in 1-7% of cases. A variety of patient-reported outcome measures were utilised including the lower extremity functional scale, short musculoskeletal functional assessment, Enneking score, and EQ-5D-3L. Limb-specific functional outcomes returned to levels similar to that of the general population although poorer outcomes were noted in specific cohorts including those with complex anatomic disease and active medical comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

Infection following fracture fixation remains a difficult problem to treat. Regardless, using modern treatments and techniques patients can have comparable functional outcomes to that of the general population. High-quality studies are required to advance our knowledge into which types of treatments offer a benefit and how to further improve outcomes.

Non-English Speakers and Socioeconomic Minorities are Significantly Less Likely to Complete Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: Analysis of 16,119 Cases

BACKGROUND

The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement requires patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) completion for total knee/hip arthroplasty (TKA/THA) patients. A 90% completion rate to avoid penalties was planned for 2023 but has been delayed. Our analysis compares TKA/THA PROM completion and results across demographics. We hypothesized that minority groups would be less likely to complete PROMs.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed from 2018 to 2021 of 16,119 patients who underwent primary elective TKA or THA at a single institution. Pairwise chi-squared tests, t-tests, analysis of variance, and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to compare PROM completion rates and scores across demographics and surgery type (TKA/THA).

RESULTS

Comparing patients who had (N = 7,664) and did not have (N = 8,455) documented PROMs, completion rates were significantly lower in patients who were women, Black, Hispanic, less educated, used Medicaid insurance, lived in lower income neighborhoods, spoke non-English languages, required an interpreter, and underwent TKA versus THA. After regression analyses, odds ratios for PROM completion remained significantly lower in non-English speakers, Hispanic and Medicaid patients, lower income groups, and patients undergoing TKA. For the 31.8% of patients who completed both preoperative/postoperative PROMs, women, Black, and non-English speaking patients had significantly lower PROM scores for most measures preoperatively and postoperatively despite similar or better improvements after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing TKA and non-English speaking, ethnic, and socioeconomic minorities are less likely to complete PROMs. Strategies to create, validate, and collect PROMs for these populations are needed to avoid exacerbation of healthcare disparities.

Do the Revision Rates of Arthroplasty Surgeons Correlate With Postoperative Patient-reported Outcome Measure Scores? A Study From the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are a pragmatic and efficient means to evaluate the functional quality of arthroplasty beyond revision rates, which are used by most joint replacement registries to judge success. The relationship between these two measures of quality-revision rates and PROMs-is unknown, and not every procedure with a poor functional result is revised. It is logical-although still untested-that higher cumulative revision rates correlate inversely with PROMs for individual surgeons; more revisions are associated with lower PROM scores.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We used data from a large national joint replacement registry to ask: (1) Does a surgeon's early THA cumulative percent revision (CPR) rate and (2) early TKA CPR rate correlate with the postoperative PROMs of patients undergoing primary THA and TKA, respectively, who have not undergone revision?

METHODS

Elective primary THA and TKA procedures in patients with a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis that were performed between August 2018 and December 2020 and registered in the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry PROMs program were eligible. THAs and TKAs were eligible for inclusion in the primary analysis if 6-month postoperative PROMs were available, the operating surgeon was clearly identified, and the surgeon had performed at least 50 primary THAs or TKAs. Based on the inclusion criteria, 17,668 THAs were performed at eligible sites. We excluded 8878 procedures that were not matched to the PROMs program, leaving 8790 procedures. A further 790 were excluded because they were performed by unknown or ineligible surgeons or were revised, leaving 8000 procedures performed by 235 eligible surgeons, including 4256 (53%; 3744 cases of missing data) patients who had postoperative Oxford Hip Scores and 4242 (53%; 3758 cases of missing data) patients who had a postoperative EQ-VAS score recorded. Complete covariate data were available for 3939 procedures for the Oxford Hip Score and for 3941 procedures for the EQ-VAS. A total of 26,624 TKAs were performed at eligible sites. We excluded 12,685 procedures that were not matched to the PROMs program, leaving 13,939 procedures. A further 920 were excluded because they were performed by unknown or ineligible surgeons, or because they were revisions, leaving 13,019 procedures performed by 276 eligible surgeons, including 6730 (52%; 6289 cases of missing data) patients who had had postoperative Oxford Knee Scores and 6728 (52%; 6291 cases of missing data) patients who had a postoperative EQ-VAS score recorded. Complete covariate data were available for 6228 procedures for the Oxford Knee Score and for 6241 procedures for the EQ-VAS. The Spearman correlation between the operating surgeon's 2-year CPR and 6-month postoperative EQ-VAS Health and Oxford Hip or Oxford Knee Score was evaluated for THA and TKA procedures where a revision had not been performed. Associations between postoperative Oxford and EQ-VAS scores and a surgeon's 2-year CPR were estimated based on multivariate Tobit regressions and a cumulative link model with a probit link, adjusting for patient age, gender, ASA score, BMI category, preoperative PROMs, as well as surgical approach for THA. Missing data were accounted for using multiple imputation, with models assuming they were missing at random and a worst-case scenario.

RESULTS

Of the eligible THA procedures, postoperative Oxford Hip Score and surgeon 2-year CPR were correlated so weakly as to be clinically irrelevant (Spearman correlation ρ = -0.09; p < 0.001), and the correlation with postoperative EQ-VAS was close to zero (ρ = -0.02; p = 0.25). Of the eligible TKA procedures, postoperative Oxford Knee Score and EQ-VAS and surgeon 2-year CPR were correlated so weakly as to be clinically irrelevant (ρ = -0.04; p = 0.004 and ρ = 0.03; p = 0.006, respectively). All models accounting for missing data found the same result.

CONCLUSION

A surgeon's 2-year CPR did not exhibit a clinically relevant correlation with PROMs after THA or TKA, and all surgeons had similar postoperative Oxford scores. PROMs, revision rates, or both may be inaccurate or imperfect indicators of successful arthroplasty. Missing data may limit the findings of this study, although the results were consistent under a variety of different missing data scenarios. Innumerable factors contribute to arthroplasty results, including patient-related variables, differences in implant design, and the technical quality of the procedure. PROMs and revision rates may be analyzing two different facets of function after arthroplasty. Although surgeon variables are associated with revision rates, patient factors may exert a stronger influence on functional outcomes. Future research should identify variables that correlate with functional outcome. Additionally, given the gross level of function that Oxford scores record, outcome measures that can identify clinically meaningful functional differences are required. The use of Oxford scores in national arthroplasty registries may rightfully be questioned.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Evaluating a web-based personalized decision report for total knee or hip replacement: Lessons learned from patients

RATIONALE

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in the context of clinical care, but evaluation of patients' perspectives of PRO-based applications in routine care remains limited.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This paper investigates patients' acceptability of a personalized web-based decision report for total knee or hip replacement and identifies opportunities to refine the report.

METHOD

This qualitative evaluation was embedded in a pragmatic cluster randomized trial of the report. We interviewed 25 patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis about their experiences using the personalized decision report in the context of a surgical consultation. The web-based report contained current descriptive PRO scores of pain, function and general physical health; tailored predicted postoperative PRO scores (i.e., personalized likely outcomes based on actual knee or hip replacement outcomes of similar patients in a national registry); and information about alternative nonoperative treatments. Two trained researchers analysed the interview data qualitatively using a combination of inductive and deductive coding.

RESULTS

We identified three major categories for evaluation: content of report, presentation of data in report and engagement with report. Patients generally liked the report overall but specifically valued different pages of the report based on where they were in the surgical decision-making process. Patients identified areas of confusion in data presentation related to graph orientation, terminology and interpretation of T-scores. Patients also highlighted support needs to meaningfully engage with the information in the report.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight areas of opportunity to further refine this personalized web-based decision report and similar patient-facing PRO applications for routine clinical care. Specific examples include additional tailoring of reports via filterable web-based dashboards and scalable educational supports to facilitate more independent patient understanding and use.

[Clinical value of instrumental gait analysis]

BACKGROUND

Instrumental gait analysis is becoming an established addition to conventional diagnostic methods for the clinical assessment of complex movement disorders. It can provide objective and high resolution motion data and contains information that is not observable with conventional clinical methods, such as muscle activation during gait.

UTILISATION

Instrumental gait analysis can add observer independent parameters to the treatment planning of individuals as well as provide insights into pathomechanisms with clinical research studies. Limiting factors for the use of gait analysis technology are currently the time and personnel expenditures for measurements and data processing, as well as the extensive amount of training time required for data interpretation. This article illustrates the clinical value of instrumental gait analysis and specifies its synergies with conventional diagnostic methods.

Toward Enhanced Clinical Decision Support for Patients Undergoing a Hip or Knee Replacement: Focus Group and Interview Study With Surgeons

BACKGROUND

The current assessment of recovery after total hip or knee replacement is largely based on the measurement of health outcomes through self-report and clinical observations at follow-up appointments in clinical settings. Home activity-based monitoring may improve assessment of recovery by enabling the collection of more holistic information on a continuous basis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to introduce orthopedic surgeons to time-series analyses of patient activity data generated from a platform of sensors deployed in the homes of patients who have undergone primary total hip or knee replacement and understand the potential role of these data in postoperative clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Orthopedic surgeons and registrars were recruited through a combination of convenience and snowball sampling. Inclusion criteria were a minimum required experience in total joint replacement surgery specific to the hip or knee or familiarity with postoperative recovery assessment. Exclusion criteria included a lack of specific experience in the field. Of the 9 approached participants, 6 (67%) orthopedic surgeons and 3 (33%) registrars took part in either 1 of 3 focus groups or 1 of 2 interviews. Data were collected using an action-based approach in which stimulus materials (mock data visualizations) provided imaginative and creative interactions with the data. The data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Each data visualization was presented sequentially followed by a discussion of key illustrative commentary from participants, ending with a summary of key themes emerging across the focus group and interview data set.

CONCLUSIONS

The limitations of the evidence are as follows. The data presented are from 1 English hospital. However, all data reflect the views of surgeons following standard national approaches and training. Although convenience sampling was used, participants' background, skills, and experience were considered heterogeneous. Passively collected home monitoring data offered a real opportunity to more objectively characterize patients' recovery from surgery. However, orthopedic surgeons highlighted the considerable difficulty in navigating large amounts of complex data within short medical consultations with patients. Orthopedic surgeons thought that a proposed dashboard presenting information and decision support alerts would fit best with existing clinical workflows. From this, the following guidelines for system design were developed: minimize the risk of misinterpreting data, express a level of confidence in the data, support clinicians in developing relevant skills as time-series data are often unfamiliar, and consider the impact of patient engagement with data in the future.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021862.

Hospital variation in revision rates after primary knee arthroplasty was not explained by patient selection: baseline data from 1452 patients in the Danish prospective multicenter cohort study, SPARK

PURPOSE

Revision rates following primary knee arthroplasty vary by country, region and hospital. The SPARK study was initiated to compare primary surgery across three Danish regions with consistently different revision rates. The present study investigated whether the variations were associated with differences in the primary patient selection.

METHODS

A prospective observational cohort study included patients scheduled Sep 2016 Dec 2017 for primary knee arthroplasty (total, medial/lateral unicompartmental or patellofemoral) at three high-volume hospitals, representing regions with 2-year cumulative revision rates of 1, 2 and 5%, respectively. Hospitals were compared with respects to patient demographics, preoperative patient-reported outcome measures, motivations for surgery, implant selection, radiological osteoarthritis and the regional incidence of primary surgery. Statistical tests (parametric and non-parametric) comprised all three hospitals.

RESULTS

Baseline data was provided by 1452 patients (89% of included patients, 56% of available patients). Patients in Copenhagen (Herlev-Gentofte Hospital, high-revision) were older (68.6 ± 9 years) than those in low-revision hospitals (Aarhus 66.6 ± 10 y. and Aalborg (Farsø) 67.3 ± 9 y., p = 0.002). In Aalborg, patients who had higher Body Mass Index (mean 30.2 kg/m² versus 28.2 (Aarhus) and 28.7 kg/m² (Copenhagen), p < 0.001), were more likely to be male (56% versus 45 and 43%, respectively, p = 0.002), and exhibited fewer anxiety and depression symptoms (EQ-5D-5L) (24% versus 34 and 38%, p = 0.01). The preoperative Oxford Knee Score (23.3 ± 7), UCLA Activity Scale (4.7 ± 2), range of motion (Copenhagen Knee ROM Scale) and patient motivations were comparable across hospitals but varied with implant type. Radiological classification ≥ 2 was observed in 94% (Kellgren-Lawrence) and 67% (Ahlbäck) and was more frequent in Aarhus (low-revision) (p ≤ 0.02), where unicompartmental implants were utilized most (49% versus 14 (Aalborg) and 23% (Copenhagen), p < 0.001). In the Capital Region (Copenhagen), the incidence of surgery was 15-28% higher (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported outcome measures prior to primary knee arthroplasty were comparable across hospitals with differing revision rates. While radiographic classifications and surgical incidence indicated higher thresholds for primary surgery in one low-revision hospital, most variations in patient and implant selection were contrary to well-known revision risk factors, suggesting that patient selection differences alone were unlikely to be responsible for the observed variation in revision rates across Danish hospitals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, Prospective cohort study.

Does Acetabular Bone Loss Severity Associate with Patient Reported Outcome Measures and Reoperation Rate in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

Acetabular bone loss is a challenging clinical problem when performing revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). This study aimed to evaluate how acetabular bone loss severity influences (1) clinical outcomes and (2) patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in rTHA patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent rTHA with acetabular component revision from January 2016 to February 2022 were included. Treating surgeons determined Paprosky acetabular bone loss classification intraoperatively. Patients were grouped based on numeric classification (PI, PII, or PIII) to categorize severity. Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR.) and Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) score were collected preoperatively and one year postoperatively. There were 197 patients included. Paprosky classification was PI for 47 patients (23.9%), PII for 113 patients (57.4%), and PIII for 37 patients (18.8%). Mean clinical follow-up was 29 months (range, 1 to 69).

RESULTS

Reoperation rate was 0% (0 patients), 6.2% (7 patients), and 10.8% (4 patients) for PI, PII and PIII groups respectively (p=0.052). Mean preoperative HOOS, JR. and LEAS for PI, PII and PIII groups were significantly different, but one-year postoperative HOOS, JR. and LEAS did not differ significantly. Rates of HOOS, JR. minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement differed significantly between bone loss groups.

CONCLUSION

In this study of rTHA patients, greater acetabular bone loss severity was associated with worse preoperative PROMs and trended towards higher reoperation rate. Postoperative PROMs for bone loss severity groups were statistically similar. Patients who had worse acetabular bone loss were more likely to achieve HOOS, JR. MCID postoperatively.

Can PROMIS Measures Estimate High Impact Chronic Pain After Total Joint Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

High impact chronic pain (HICP) is not typically measured following orthopaedic surgeries, but has a substantial negative impact on post-operative 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% Confidence Intervals) 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 cut-off scores for PROMIS pain interference and physical function.

CONCLUSION

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

Patient-rated satisfaction and improvement following hip and knee replacements: Development of prediction models

RATIONALE

Effective preoperative assessments of determinants of health status and function may improve postoperative outcomes.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

We developed risk scores of preoperative patient factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as predictors of patient-rated satisfaction and improvement following hip and knee replacements.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected National Health Service and independent sector patient data (n = 30,457), including patients' self-reported demographics, comorbidities, PROMs (Oxford Hip/Knee score (OHS/OKS) and European Quality of Life (EQ5D index and health-scale), were analysed. Outcomes were defined as patient-reported satisfaction and improvement following surgery at 7-month follow-up. Univariable and multivariable-adjusted logistic regressions were undertaken to build prediction models; model discrimination was evaluated with the concordance index (c-index) and nomograms were developed to allow the estimation of probabilities.

RESULTS

Of the 14,651 subjects with responses for satisfaction following hip replacements 564 (3.8%) reported dissatisfaction, and 1433 (9.2%) of the 15,560 following knee replacement reported dissatisfaction. A total of 14,662 had responses for perceived improvement following hip replacement (lack of improvement in 391; 2.7%) and 15,588 following knee replacement (lack of improvements in 1092; 7.0%). Patients reporting poor outcomes had worse preoperative PROMs. Several factors, including age, gender, patient comorbidities and EQ5D, were included in the final prediction models: C-indices of these models were 0.613 and 0.618 for dissatisfaction and lack of improvement, respectively, for hip replacement and 0.614 and 0.598, respectively, for knee replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

Using easily accessible preoperative patient factors, including PROMs, we developed models which may help predict dissatisfaction and lack of improvement following hip and knee replacements and facilitate risk stratification and decision-making processes.

Total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis for patients aged 50-85 years with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis: the TARVA RCT

Background

We aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and complication rates of total ankle replacement with those of arthrodesis (i.e. ankle fusion) in the treatment of end-stage ankle osteoarthritis.

Methods

This was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Patients with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis who were aged 50-85 years and were suitable for both procedures were recruited from 17 UK hospitals and randomised using minimisation. The primary outcome was the change in the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain scores between the preoperative baseline and 52 weeks post surgery.

Results

Between March 2015 and January 2019, 303 participants were randomised using a minimisation algorithm: 152 to total ankle replacement and 151 to ankle fusion. At 52 weeks, the mean (standard deviation) Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score was 31.4 (30.4) in the total ankle replacement arm (n = 136) and 36.8 (30.6) in the ankle fusion arm (n = 140); the adjusted difference in the change was -5.6 (95% confidence interval -12.5 to 1.4; p = 0.12) in the intention-to-treat analysis. By week 52, one patient in the total ankle replacement arm required revision. Rates of wound-healing issues (13.4% vs. 5.7%) and nerve injuries (4.2% vs. < 1%) were higher and the rate of thromboembolic events was lower (2.9% vs. 4.9%) in the total ankle replacement arm than in the ankle fusion arm. The bone non-union rate (based on plain radiographs) in the ankle fusion arm was 12.1%, but only 7.1% of patients had symptoms. A post hoc analysis of fixed-bearing total ankle replacement showed a statistically significant improvement over ankle fusion in Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score (-11.1, 95% confidence interval -19.3 to -2.9; p = 0.008). We estimate a 69% likelihood that total ankle replacement is cost-effective compared with ankle fusion at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over the patient's lifetime.

Limitations

This initial report contains only 52-week data, which must therefore be interpreted with caution. In addition, the pragmatic nature of the study means that there was heterogeneity between surgical implants and techniques. The trial was run across 17 NHS centres to ensure that decision-making streams reflected the standard of care in the NHS as closely as possible.

Conclusions

Both total ankle replacement and ankle fusion improved patients' quality of life at 1 year, and both appear to be safe. When total ankle replacement was compared with ankle fusion overall, we were unable to show a statistically significant difference between the two arms in terms of our primary outcome measure. The total ankle replacement versus ankle arthrodesis (TARVA) trial is inconclusive in terms of superiority of total ankle replacement, as the 95% confidence interval for the adjusted treatment effect includes both a difference of zero and the minimal important difference of 12, but it can rule out the superiority of ankle fusion. A post hoc analysis comparing fixed-bearing total ankle replacement with ankle fusion showed a statistically significant improvement of total ankle replacement over ankle fusion in Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire walking/standing domain score. Total ankle replacement appears to be cost-effective compared with ankle fusion at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained over a patient's lifetime based on long-term economic modelling.

Future work

We recommend long-term follow-up of this important cohort, in particular radiological and clinical progress. We also recommend studies to explore the sensitivity of clinical scores to detect clinically important differences between arms when both have already achieved a significant improvement from baseline.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN60672307 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02128555.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Do patient-reported outcome measures improve after aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) changes in: (1) pain, function and global health; and (2) predictors of PROMs in patients undergoing aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) using a multilevel model with patients nested within surgeon.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 216 patients with baseline and 1-year PROMs who underwent aseptic rTHA between January 2016 and December 2017 were analysed. The most common indication for rTHA was aseptic loosening, instability, and implant failure. The PROMs included in this study were HOOS Pain and HOOS Physical Function Short-form (PS), Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Score (VR-12 PCS), and VR-12 Mental Component Score (MCS). Multivariable linear regression models were constructed for predicting 1-year PROMs.

RESULTS

Mean 1-year PROMs improvement for aseptic revisions were 30.4 points for HOOS Pain and 22.1 points for HOOS PS. Predictors of better pain relief were patients with higher baseline pain scores. Predictors of better 1-year function were patients with higher baseline function and patients with a posterolateral hip surgical approach during revision. Although VR-12 PCS scores had an overall improvement, nearly 50% of patients saw no improvement or had worse physical component scores. Only 30.7% of patients reported improvements in VR-12 MCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, patients undergoing aseptic rTHA improved in pain and function PROMs at 1 year. Although global health assessment improved overall, nearly half of aseptic rTHA patients reported no change in physical/mental health status. The associations highlighted in this study can help guide the shared decision-making process by setting expectations before aseptic revision THA.

Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): thresholds for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip and knee scores for patients with total hip and knee replacement

PURPOSE

To define patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip (OHS) and knee (OKS) scores 6 and 12 months after total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement. To compare PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L scored using: (1) the Canadian value set, (2) the crosswalk value set, and (3) the equal weighted Level Sum Score (LSS).

METHODS

We mailed questionnaires to consecutive patients following surgeon referral for primary THR or TKR and at 6 and 12 months post-surgery. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the EQ-5D-5L, the OHS, and OKS. We assessed PASS cut-off values for PROMs using percentile and ROC methods, with the Youden Index.

RESULTS

Five hundred forty-two surgical patients (mean age, 64 years, 57% female, 49% THR) completed baseline and 12-month questionnaires. 89% of THR and 81% of TKR patients rated PASS as acceptable at 12 months. PASS cut-off values for THR for the EQ-5D-5L (Canadian) were 0.85 (percentile) and 0.84 (Youden) at 12 months. Cut-off values were similar for the LSS (0.85 and 0.85) and lower for the crosswalk value set (0.74 and 0.73), respectively. EQ-5D-5L cut-off values for TKR were Canadian, 0.77 (Percentile) and 0.78 (Youden), LSS, 0.75 and 0.80, and crosswalk, 0.67 and 0.74, respectively. Cut-off values 6 and 12 months post-surgery ranged from 38 to 39 for the OHS, and 28 to 36 for the OKS (range 0 worst to 48 best).

CONCLUSION

PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford scores varied, not only between methods and timing of assessment, but also by different EQ-5D-5L value sets, which vary between countries. Because of this variation, PASS cut-off values are not necessarily generalizable to other populations of TJR patients. We advise caution in interpreting PROMs when using EQ-5D-5L PASS cut-off values developed in different countries. A standardization of methods is needed before published cut-off values can be used with confidence in other populations.

Patient-reported outcome for 17,648 patients in 5 different Swedish orthopaedic quality registers before and 1 year after surgery: an observational study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The EQ-5D is a patientreported outcome measure (PROM). To make priorities and allocate resources between patients and surgical procedures it is necessary to evaluate outcome differences, which is why comparing PROMs between registers is important. We compared EQ-5D data and the follow-up rate for selected diagnoses reported to Swedish orthopedic registers before and 1 year after surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients from 5 orthopedic registers (Swespine, Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register, Swedankle, and Swefoot) who, in 2014-2018, underwent surgery in southern Sweden were included in the study. Data on the EQ-5D index, individual questions, and the EQ-VAS at baseline and at the 1-year follow-up was compared.

RESULTS

17,648 patients had completed the EQ-5D pre- and 1-year postoperatively. The follow-up rate ranged from 32% to 88%. All registers showed a statistical and clinically relevant improvement in the EQ-5D index (mean improvement 0.29-0.39), where patients who underwent hip arthroplasties experienced the largest improvement. The EQ-5D index improvements in patients with foot and ankle surgeries were larger than for patients with knee arthroplasties and spinal surgeries. The dimensions "self-care" and "usual activities" had the largest change in patients reporting "some problems."

CONCLUSION

All 5 registers showed a clinically relevant improvement 1 year postoperatively regarding the EQ-5D index, supporting continuous resource allocation to these groups of patients and surgical procedures. However, using PROM data to present register differences was challenged by the high number of non-responders.

The reliability of revision rates following primary shoulder arthroplasty as a quality indicator to rank hospital performance: a national registry analysis including 13,104 shoulders and 87 hospitals

BACKGROUND

To assess the extent of between-hospital variation in revision following primary shoulder arthroplasty (SA), both overall and for specific revision indications to guide quality improvement initiatives, and to assess whether revision rates are suitable as quality indicators to reliably rank hospital performance.

METHODS

All primary SAs performed between 2014 and 2018 were included from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register to examine 1-year revision and all primary SAs performed between 2014 and 2016 for 1- and 3-year revisions. For each hospital, the observed number (O) of revisions was compared with that expected (E) based on case-mix and depicted in funnel plots with 95% control limits to identify outlier hospitals. The rankability (ie, the reliability of ranking hospitals) was calculated as the percentage of total hospital variation due to true between-hospital differences rather than chance and categorized as low (<50%), moderate (50%-75%), and high (>75%).

RESULTS

A total of 13,104 primary SAs (87 hospitals) in 2014-2018 were included, of which 7213 were performed between 2014 and 2016. Considerable between-hospital variation was found in 1-year revision in 2014-2016 (median 1.6%, interquartile range 0.0%-3.1%), identifying 3 outlier hospitals having overall significantly more revisions than expected (O/E range 1.9-2.3) and for specific indications (cuff pathology and infection). Results for 2014-2018 were similar. For 3-year revision, 3 outlier hospitals were identified (O/E range 1.7-3.3). Rankabilities for all outcomes were low.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable between-hospital variation was observed for 1- and 3-year revision rates following primary SA, where outlier hospitals could be identified based on large differences in revision for specific indications to direct quality improvement initiatives. However, rankabilities were low, meaning that much of the other (smaller) variation in performance could not be detected, rendering revisions unsuitable to rank hospital performances following primary SA.

Function and employment after total hip replacement in older adults: A narrative review

The burden of osteoarthritis (OA) has increased steadily due to an aging population, increasing life expectancy, obesity and lifestyle factors. Total hip replacement has become one of the most prevalent and successful operations globally and it is projected that demand will continue to grow as the incidence of OA continues to increase. Patients undergoing the operation expect much-improved function and pain relief but also increasingly need to return to work postoperatively, especially given the growing demand for the procedure and the encouragement of older people to continue working by most governments in the developed world. This review provides an overview of function and employment outcomes after hip arthroplasty. Despite the generally good success rate, some patients do not attain good functional outcomes and it is important that we develop ways to identify these patients preoperatively. We describe the effect of demographic, clinical and other factors on functional outcomes, as well as trajectories of physical function and pain recovery beyond the first few weeks after total hip replacement. Regarding employment outcomes, many people in work preoperatively are likely to resume to work after recovery; however, patients feel that they lack guidance from clinicians about returning to work postoperatively. Our review encompasses factors associated with return to work, timing of return to work, and potential temporary or permanent limitations that people might experience at work depending on type of employment.

Validación al español del instrumento Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale (SAPS) para reemplazo total de cadera o de rodilla

Introducción: La satisfacción del paciente es un indicador importante al evaluar los resultados clínicos de un reemplazo total de cadera o rodilla. El objetivo de este estudio fue validar al idioma español el instrumento Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale (SAPS) para reemplazo total de cadera o rodilla, y estudiar sus propiedades psicométricas. Materiales y Métodos: Se realizó un estudio de validación de corte transversal para evaluar el contenido, la consistencia interna y la validez de criterio de la SAPS. Se incluyó a 105 pacientes con reemplazo total de cadera o rodilla. La validez de criterio fue valorada con las escalas WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) y SF-36 (36-Item Short Form Survey). Resultados: Se analizó a 50 pacientes con reemplazo total de cadera y 55 con reemplazo total de rodilla y una mediana de seguimiento de 14 meses (rango intercuartílico, 11-19), con una edad de 71.3 ± 11.6 años; 73,3% (77) eran mujeres. El coeficiente alfa de Cronbach fue de 0,797 indicando una consistencia interna aceptable. La correlación entre las escalas SAPS y WOMAC fue moderada (coeficiente de Spearman 0,488; p <0,05), al igual que con el componente físico de la SF-36 (coeficiente de Spearman 0,525; p <0,05). Conclusión: La versión en español de la SAPS es una herramienta válida y confiable para medir el grado de satisfacción de los pacientes sometidos a reemplazo total de cadera o rodilla, tiene propiedades psicométricas similares a las de la escala original. Nivel de Evidencia: II

Compliance with Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measure System Data Collection Is 51% Two-years After Shoulder Arthroscopy

Objective

To determine patient compliance in completing electronic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following arthroscopic shoulder surgery and identify risk factors for noncompliance.

Methods

A retrospective review of compliance data was performed for patients who underwent arthroscopic shoulder surgery by a single surgeon in a private practice setting from June 2017 to June 2019. All patients were enrolled in Surgical Outcomes System (Arthrex) as a part of routine clinical care, and outcome reporting was integrated into our practice electronic medical record. Patient compliance with PROMs was calculated at preoperative, three-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up time points. Compliance was defined as a complete patient response to each assigned outcome module in the database over time. Logistic regression for compliance at the one-year timepoint was performed to assess for factors associated with survey compliance.

Results

Compliance with PROMs was highest preoperatively (91.1%) and decreased at each subsequent time point. The largest decrease in compliance with PROMs occurred between the preoperative and 3-month follow-up time points. Compliance was 58% at 1 year and 51% at 2 years after surgery. Overall, 36% of patients were compliant at all individual time points. There were no significant predictors of compliance with regard to age, sex, race, ethnicity, or procedure.

Conclusions

Patient compliance with PROMs decreased over time with the lowest percentage of patients completing electronic surveys at the traditional 2-year follow-up for shoulder arthroscopy. In this study, basic demographic factors were not predictive of patient compliance with PROMs.

Clinical Relevance

PROMs are commonly collected after arthroscopic shoulder surgery; however, low patient compliance may affect their utility in research and clinical practice.

Innovative technologies for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in Australia: Market access challenges and implications for patients, decision-makers, and manufacturers

PURPOSE

The success of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has expanded its use for a broader range of shoulder indications worldwide. Evidence regarding the relative efficacy and long-term safety of medical technologies used in RTSA is subjected to rigorous assessment. Nonetheless, substantial challenges impede market access for innovative shoulder implant technologies for RTSA in Australia, resulting in delayed patient access.

APPROACH

This paper addresses the key challenges associated with generating evidence for the health technology assessments of innovative medical technologies for RTSA that are required for access to the Australian market. The transition to value-based care requires establishing a benchmarking reference that incorporates patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and combines revision outcomes with additional clinical outcomes to increase patient cohort sizes. Establishing the benchmark would require agreement on the outcome measures to be collected for each indication, and investment in reporting patient-reported outcomes for RTSA to the national orthopaedic registry.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The need for increased flexibility in developing evidence for health technology assessment of RTSA medical technologies is required. Optimised approaches for benchmarking RTSA require extensive stakeholder discussions, including the agreement on evidence requirements and follow-up periods, selection of clinical outcomes, as well as pre-operative and post-operative PROMs as a value assessment.

Postoperative Pain Management and Patient Evaluations After Five Different Surgical Procedures. A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Sufficient pain management is a necessity and can play an important role in patients' contentment.

AIMS

To investigate the instituted postoperative pain treatment, patients' levels of pain, opioid consumption, and patient contentment, supplemented with a questionnaire based on the International Pain Outcome (IPO).

METHODS

This prospective observational cohort study was conducted at Zealand University Hospital Køge, Denmark (ZUHK) from March 8, 2017, to January 7, 2019, aiming for a consecutive inclusion of 200 patients, 40 from five major surgical procedures. The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (REG-121-2016) and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03080272). The Research Ethics Committee of the Zealand Region was consulted, but approval was not needed according to Danish law (J.nr. 16-000014).

RESULTS

We included 189 patients in total. We found a significant number of patients that did not achieve "no worse than mild pain" (Numeric Rating Scale ≤3) across surgical procedures. The provided pain treatment was heterogenic and inconsistent even among individuals who underwent similar surgical procedures. Although patients did not achieve "no worse than mild pain" (Numeric Rating Scale ≤3), the majority stated that they were content with their pain treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The analgesic treatment varied between procedures and patients and a significant number of patients did not achieve "no worse than mild pain" (Numeric Rating Scale ≤3). A significant association between patient contentment and experience of severe pain, pain relief, and involvement in own pain treatment, was found.

Agreement between the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Society Standardized Shoulder Assessment score (ASES) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) in patients presenting with shoulder pathology: A cohort analysis of the Clinical Quality Registry for Outcomes in Shoulder and Elbow Pathology (CROSEP) registry

Background

The choice of patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) used in shoulder studies varies based on clinician's preference and location. This creates difficulties when attempting to compare studies which have used different PROMs as their outcome measure. This study aims to assess the agreement between the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and identify factors associated with agreement.

Methods

Patients with shoulder pathology were identified from a multi-cohort observational practice registry. 1050 paired ASES and OSS pre-treatment scores were prospectively collected. Linear regression was performed to assess the agreement between the PROMs. Mixed-effects analysis of variance was performed to assess the influence of factors associated with agreement.

Results

Regression for mean total and mean function ASES and OSS demonstrated good fit (adjusted R2 57.7%, P < 0.001; and 63.9%, P < 0.001). Mean pain subscore demonstrated a poorer fit (adjusted R2 39.4%, P < 0.001). Crosswalks to convert between mean scores were produced with reasonable precision. Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey score, age and diagnosis cohort influenced agreement.

Conclusion

Mean total and mean function ASES and OSS scores agree well with each other. This allows for a more informed comparison of studies using either PROMs as their outcome measure.

Standard set of network outcomes for traumatic spinal cord injury: a consensus-based approach using the Delphi method

STUDY DESIGN

Consensus study.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to define a standardized (network) outcomes set for traumatic spinal cord injury (t-SCI), covering the patient journey from acute to chronic rehabilitation phase, including patient-relevant outcomes, adequate measurement instruments, as well as case-mix and risk factors.

SETTING

Acute Spinal Cord Injury (ASCI) Unit Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

METHODS

A modified Delphi method was performed, including a multidisciplinary panel of 19 health-care professionals with experience in t-SCI management. Formal consensus was reached after two web-based surveys, a face-to-face meeting, and a final confirmation round (threshold consensus: 70%).

RESULTS

In the first two Delphi rounds, 18/19 invited panelists (94.7%) responded and 10 panelists participated in the final meeting. The prefinal set was confirmed by all panelists. The standard set encompasses the three-tiered outcome hierarchy and consists of patient-reported and clinician-reported outcome domains and measurement instruments. Consensus was reached to include survival, degree of health or recovery, time to recovery, and return to normal activities, disutility of care or treatment process, sustainability of health and nature of recurrences, and long-term consequences of therapy. A measurement schedule was defined as well as for proposed casemix and risk factors, including demographics, clinical status, and treatment process.

CONCLUSION

A standard set of network outcomes is developed that could be implemented in hospitals and rehabilitation centers involved in the treatment of t-SCI. Using this standard set, comparison of the quality of care is possible and prognostic prediction of outcomes of treatment is feasible, so that each patient receives the right care at the right time in the right place.

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.

Outcome measures in total hip arthroplasty: have our metrics changed over 15 years?

INTRODUCTION

Consensus has not been reached regarding ideal outcome measures for total hip arthroplasty (THA) clinical evaluation and research. The goal of this review was to analyze the trends in outcome metrics within the THA literature and to discuss the potential impact of instrument heterogeneity on clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A PubMed search of all manuscripts related to THA from January 2005 to December 2019 was performed. Statistical and linear regression analyses were performed for individual outcome metrics as a proportion of total THA publications over time.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant increase in studies utilizing outcomes metrics between 2005 and 2019 (15.1-29.5%; P < 0.001; R² = 98.1%). Within the joint-specific subcategory, use of the Harris Hip Score (HHS) significantly decreased from 2005 to 2019 (82.8-57.3%; P < 0.001), use of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) significantly increased (0-6.7%; P < 0.001), and the modified HHS significantly increased (0-10.5%; P < 0.001). In the quality of life subcategory, EQ-5D demonstrated a significant increase in usage (0-34.8%; P < 0.001), while Short Form-36 significantly decreased (100% vs. 27.3%; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of outcome-reporting metrics in THA has continued to increase, resulting in added complexity within the literature. The utilization rates of individual instruments have shifted over the past 15 years. Additional study is required to determine which specific instruments are recommended.

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.

Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the Forgotten Joint Score in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

In order to better understand the clinical benefits of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and improve the interpretability of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), the establishment of a meaningful change in score is necessary. The purpose of this study is to determine the threshold of the FJS-12 for detecting the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) following primary TKA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent elective, primary TKA and answered both the FJS-12 and the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey, Joint Replacement KOOS, JR surveys 1-year postoperatively. The questionnaires were administered via a web-based electronic application. KOOS, JR score was used as the anchor. The anchor for PASS calculation should relate pain, physical function, and patient satisfaction. Two statistical methods were employed: (1) the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve point; (2) 75^th percentile of the cumulative percentage curve of patients who had the KOOS, JR score difference larger than the cut-off value.

RESULTS

This study included 457 patients. The mean 1-year FJS-12 score was 42.6 ± 27.8. The mean 1-year KOOS, JR score was 68.0 ± 17.2. A high positive correlation between FJS-12 and KOOS, JR was found (r = 0.72, P < .001) making the KOOS, JR a valid external anchor. The threshold score of the FJS-12 which maximized the sensitivity and specificity for detecting a PASS was 33.3 (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI [0.74, 0.83]). The cut-off value computed with the 75^th percentile approach was 77.1 (95% CI [73.9, 81.5]).

CONCLUSION

The PASS threshold for the FJS-12 was 33.3 and 77.1 at 1-year follow-up after primary TKA using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and 75^th percentile approaches, respectively. These values can be used to assess the successful achievement of a forgotten joint.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study.

Identification of Potential High-Risk Patients on the Basis of PROMs in a Certified Centre for Joint Replacement (EndoProthetikZentrum) Using the Example of Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

In addition to clinical parameters, the subjective assessment by the patient to evaluate the operative outcome of an arthroplasty is becoming increasingly important. Questionnaires are used to identify patients who have not achieved the treatment goal at an early stage so that further interventions can be indicated.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A questionnaire consisting of different PROMs was completed pre- and 3 months postoperatively by patients who had been treated with a hip arthroplasty. A standardised follow-up examination of these patients was carried out 12 to 16 weeks postoperatively, after which it was determined whether further therapy was necessary to achieve the treatment goal. Different consequences were defined for this.

RESULTS

Significant differences were found between the groups of consequences of follow-up examinations over both time points, but also when postoperative scores were considered exclusively. Furthermore, the correlations for the postoperative scores and some consequences of the clinical follow-up for the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the OHS functional score and the Euroquol-5D show moderate effects. Thus, the collection of these postoperative scores is sufficient to identify potential high risk patients. Based on a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, threshold values could be determined for these scores, for which a follow-up examination is recommended.

CONCLUSION

Patients who could not achieve functional improvement, pain reduction and improvement in quality of life after implantation of a total hip replacement must be identified at an early stage. The results of our study show that with the help of the Oxford Hip Score and Euroquol-5D, which are answered by the patients three months postoperatively, such high risk patients can be identified. This finding is an added value for the further development of the EndoCert certification system and holistic quality assurance in arthroplasties, while the personnel and time effort remain manageable.

Use of computerised adaptive testing to reduce the number of items in patient-reported hip and knee outcome scores: an analysis of the NHS England National Patient-Reported Outcome Measures programme

OBJECTIVE

Over 160 000 participants per year complete the 12-item Oxford Hip and Knee Scores (OHS/OKS) as part of the NHS England Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) programme. We used a modern computational approach, known as computerised adaptive testing (CAT), to simulate individually tailored OHS and OKS assessment, with the goal of reducing the number of questions a patient must complete without compromising measurement accuracy.

METHODS

We fit the 2018/2019 PROMs data to an item response theory (IRT) model. We assessed IRT model assumptions alongside reliability. We used parameters from the IRT model with data from 2017/2018 to simulate CAT assessments. Two simulations were run until a prespecified SE of measurement was met (SE=0.32 and SE=0.45). We compared the number of questions required to meet each cut-off and assessed the correlation between the full-length and CAT administration.

RESULTS

We conducted IRT analysis using 40 432 OHS and 44 714 OKS observations. The OHS and OKS were both unidimensional (root mean square error of approximation 0.08 and 0.07, respectively) and marginal reliability 0.91 and 0.90. The CAT, with a precision limit of SE=0.32 and SE=0.45, required a median of four items (IQR 1) and two items (IQR 1), respectively, for the OHS, and median of four items (IQR 2) and two items (IQR 0) for the OKS. This represents a potential 82% reduction in PROM length. In the context of 160 000 yearly assessments, these methodologies could result in the omission of some 1 280 000 redundant questions per year, which equates to 40 000 hours of patient time.

CONCLUSION

The application of IRT to the OHS and OKS produces an efficient and substantially reduced CAT. We have demonstrated a path to reduce the burden and potentially increase the compliance for these ubiquitous outcome measures without compromising measurement accuracy.

The History and Applications of the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12)

There has been an increasing emphasis on placing patients at the center of clinical care and health care research and, in particular, assessing outcomes and experiences from the patient's perspective. One of the most widely used patient-reported outcome instruments is the Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12). This article reviews the VR-12 development and its applications over the last 2 decades, including research and potential uses in clinical care.

Patient registries in orthopedics and orthobiologic procedures: a narrative review

There has been increasing evidence and growing popularity of orthobiologic treatments, such as platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate concentrate, and microfragmented adipose tissue. However, real-world data, including patient-reported pain and function outcomes, remains sparse for these procedures. Thus, collecting patient-reported outcome measures is important to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these treatments and hopefully improve patient care. Patient reported outcome measures can systematically be collected through patient registries. This narrative review serves to describe the data collection platforms and registries that obtain patient-reported outcome measures on orthobiologic procedures and provide a discussion on the benefits and limitations of registries. An internet search of the list of orthopedic registries available was conducted, and registries that collect patient-reported outcome measures for orthobiologic procedures were identified. Additional information regarding these various registries was collected by directly contacting these vendors. Publications from these registries, including case series, observational studies, and annual reports, were also reviewed. Providing this review will inform clinicians of a digital tool that can increase the efficiency of collecting outcome measures for orthobiologics and aid physicians in choosing a data collection platform.

Combinations of Preoperative Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Phenotype (Pain, Function, and Mental Health) Predict Outcome After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Value-driven healthcare models prioritize patient-perceived benefits to quantify the quality of care through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) is the highest level of symptom beyond which a patient considers his/her condition satisfactory. We identified preoperative phenotypes of PROMs associated with not achieving PASS at 1 year following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and explored the relationships between such phenotypes with hospital utilization parameters.

METHODS

A prospective institutional cohort of 5,274 primary TKAs for osteoarthritis from 2016 to 2019 with 1-year follow-up were included. Preoperative scores on Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain, KOOS-Physical function Short form (PS), and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) Mental Component Summary (MCS) were used to develop patient phenotypes. Associations between preoperative "phenotype" and 1-year PASS, discharge disposition, length of stay, 90-day readmission, and 1-year reoperation were evaluated using multivariate regression.

RESULTS

In total, 16.3% (n = 862) of patients reported their state as "not acceptable" at 1 year. A combination of low scores in each of the presently examined PROMs was associated with the highest odds of 1-year dissatisfaction (odds ratio 2.18, 95% confidence interval 1.74-2.74). The PROM phenotypes were the greatest drivers compared to sociodemographic variables in predicting satisfaction. Combinations of low scores in VR-12 MCS and KOOS-PS were significantly associated with both non-home discharge status and prolonged length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Patients with combined lower preoperative scores across multiple PROMs (KOOS-Pain <41.7, KOOS-PS <51.5, and VR-12 MCS <52.8) have increased odds of dissatisfaction after TKA. Measuring pain, function, and mental health concurrently as phenotypes may help identify TKA patients at risk for not achieving a satisfactory outcome at 1 year.

Development and Validation of Crosswalks Between the Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement/Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement

BACKGROUND

The wide variety of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess outcomes following total joint arthroplasty can present a substantial methodological obstacle when attempting to compare information across studies or between institutions. A simple solution is to create crosswalks that reliably convert scores between patient-reported outcome measures. Our goal is to create and validate crosswalks between the commonly used Western Ontario & McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and short-form versions of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (HOOS JR)/Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS JR.).

METHODS

Patients in our joint replacement registry were included if they underwent primary total hip arthroplasty (n = 4649) or total knee arthroplasty (n = 3750) for osteoarthritis between May 2007 and February 2012. We used their preoperative and 2-year postoperative HOOS scores (n = 6351) or KOOS scores (n = 4688) to generate the patients' WOMAC and HOOS JR/KOOS JR scores. The equipercentile equating method was applied to create 10 crosswalks: HOOS JR/KOOS JR to WOMAC Total (WOMAC-T), and WOMAC-T, WOMAC Pain (WOMAC-P), WOMAC Stiffness (WOMAC-S), and WOMAC Function (WOMAC-F) to HOOS JR/KOOS JR. Crosswalk validity was assessed by comparing actual and derived scores using Spearman's rank correlation coefficients in a bootstrapped cohort.

RESULTS

All 10 crosswalks showed strong positive correlations ranging from 0.846 (WOMAC-S to KOOS JR) to 0.981 (HOOS JR to WOMAC-T).

CONCLUSION

We created and validated 10 crosswalks between WOMAC and HOOS JR/KOOS JR. We recommend using the crosswalks between WOMAC-T and HOOS JR/KOOS JR when possible, as they demonstrated the highest correlation. WOMAC-F or WOMAC-P should be used in favor of WOMAC-S if only subscores are available. The HOOS JR/KOOS JR should only be converted to a WOMAC-T.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

National Implementation of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Program for Joint Replacement Surgery: Pilot Study

Background

There is a global emphasis on expanding data collection for joint replacement procedures beyond implant attributes and progression to revision surgery. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly considered as an important measure of surgical outcomes from a patient’s perspective. However, a major limitation preventing wider use of PROMs data in national data collection has been the inability to systematically collect and share electronic information with relevant stakeholders in a comprehensive and financially sustainable manner.

Objective

This study reports on the development of an electronic data capture and reporting system by a national registry for the collection of PROMs and the processes used to identify and overcome barriers to implementation and uptake. The study also aims to provide a cost breakdown of establishing and maintaining a nationwide electronic PROMs program.

Methods

Between 2018 and 2020, 3 governance and advisory committees were established to develop and implement a PROMs pilot program nested within a nationwide joint replacement registry. The program involved electronic collection of preoperative and 6-month postoperative data for hip, knee, or shoulder replacement surgery from 44 Australian hospitals. Resource requirements for the program included a project manager, software developers, data manager, and statistician. An online platform was tested, refined, and implemented for electronic PROMs collection with scalability considered for future expansion to all Australian hospitals and additional data fields. Technical capabilities included different access for multiple user types, patient registration, automatic reminders via SMS text messages and email, online consent, and patient outcome real-time dashboards accessible for different user groups (surgeons, patients, hospitals, and project stakeholders).

Results

During the PROMs pilot period there were 19,699 primary procedures undertaken with 10,204 registered procedures in the electronic system. This equated to 51.80% of people who had a joint replacement at participating hospitals during this period. Patient registration and data collection were efficient (20-30 seconds and 10-12 minutes, respectively). Engagement with the reporting dashboards (as a proportion of those who viewed their dashboard) varied by user group: 197/277 (71.1%) hospital administrators, 68/129 (52.7%) project stakeholders, 177/391 (45.3%) surgeons, and 1138/8840 patients (12.9%). Cost analysis determined an overall cost per patient of Aus $7-15 (approximately US $5-12) for 2 PROMs collections per joint replacement procedure once the program was established.

Conclusions

Successful implementation of an orthopedic PROMs program with planned scalability for a broader national rollout requires significant funding and staffing resources. However, this expenditure can be considered worthwhile, given that collection and reporting of PROMs can drive health care improvement processes. Further consideration of strategies to improve stakeholder engagement with electronic reporting dashboards (particularly for patients and surgeons) will be critical to the ongoing success of a national PROMs program.