Evaluating instrument responsiveness in joint function: The HOOS JR, the KOOS JR, and the PROMIS PF CAT

Residual Postoperative Valgus After Total Knee Arthroplasty for Preoperative Valgus Deformity Results in Inferior Patient-Reported Outcomes

Background

The optimal postoperative coronal alignment after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for preoperative valgus deformity is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the impact of postoperative coronal alignment on clinical outcomes following TKA for valgus deformities.

Methods

Patients in preoperative valgus undergoing primary TKA between 2010 and 2020 with at least 1 year of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative and postoperative mechanical alignment was assessed on long-leg radiographs via the hip-knee-ankle angle. Postoperative alignment was categorized into valgus (>2° valgus), neutral (within 2° of the mechanical axis), or varus (>2° varus). Patient demographics, preoperative and postoperative outcome scores, and complications were collected.

Results

106 patients met inclusion criteria, with a mean preoperative valgus deformity of 11° (standard deviation ± 6.1). Postoperatively, 18 patients were in varus alignment, 58 were neutral, and 30 remained in valgus. At 2-year follow-up, multivariate analyses showed that patients in neutral or varus alignment postoperatively had superior Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Physical and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain scores compared to those in residual valgus. Varus knees showed significantly greater improvement in Knee Society Score Function scores compared to valgus knees. At final follow-up, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain scores were significantly better in varus knees. Patients in varus were 7.79 times more likely to achieve the minimal clinically important difference VR-12 Physical score, while patients in neutral were 3.26 times more likely to achieve the minimal clinically important difference for Knee Society Score Function when compared to valgus knees.

Conclusions

Correcting preoperative valgus coronal alignment to neutral or varus yields improved patient-reported outcomes when compared to residual valgus.

Quantifying Patient Expectations for Total Knee Arthroplasty: Expectations for Improvement Are Greater Than Minimal Clinically Important Difference

BACKGROUND

Achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is common, yet up to 20% patient dissatisfaction persists. Unmet expectations may explain post-TKA dissatisfaction. No prior studies have quantified patient expectations using the same patient-reported outcome metric as used for MCID to allow direct comparison.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of patients undergoing TKA with 5 fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons at one academic center. Baseline Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) domains were assessed. Expected PROMIS scores were determined by asking patients to indicate the outcomes they were expecting at 12 months postoperatively. Predicted scores were generated from a predictive model validated in the Function and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement (FORCE-TJR) dataset. T-tests were used to compare baseline, expected, and predicted PROMIS scores. Expected scores were compared to PROMIS MCID values obtained from the literature. Regression models were used to identify patient characteristics associated with high expectations.

RESULTS

There were 93 patients included. Mean age was 67 years (range, 30 to 85) and 55% were women. Mean baseline PROMIS PF and PI was 34.4 ± 6.7 and 62.2 ± 6.4, respectively. Patients expected significant improvement for PF of 1.9 times the MCID (MCID = 11.3; mean expected improvement = 21.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 19.6 to 23.5, P < .001) and for PI of 2.3 times the MCID (MCID = 8.9; mean expected improvement = 20.6, 95% CI 19.1-22.2, P < .001). Predicted scores were significantly lower than expected scores (mean difference = 9.5, 95% CI 7.7 to 11.3, P < .001). No unique patient characteristics were associated with high expectations (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this study is the first to quantify preoperative patient expectations using the same metric as MCID to allow for direct comparison. Patient expectations for improvement following TKA are ∼2× greater than MCID and are significantly greater than predicted outcome scores. This discrepancy challenges currently accepted standards of success after TKA and indicates a need for improved expectation setting prior to surgery.

Correlation between the optimal screening for prediction of referral and outcome yellow flag tool and patient-reported legacy outcome measures in patients undergoing shoulder surgery

Background

The Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) Tool is a 10-item multidimensional screening tool utilized to evaluate pain-related psychological traits in individuals with musculoskeletal pain conditions. The validity of postoperatively collected OSPRO-YF is unclear. This study sought to assess validity of the OSPRO-YF by comparing it to patient-reported outcome scores in both preoperative and postoperative settings.

Hypothesis

The authors hypothesized that OSPRO-YF overall score would correlate with shoulder and global function PROs at preoperative and postoperative timepoints.

Methods

A review of 101 patients undergoing shoulder surgery by one sports medicine orthopedic surgeon at a large academic institution was conducted. 90 and 54 patients had complete preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome responses. OSPRO-YF, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Evaluation Form, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS-CAT) were routinely administered before and after surgery at the senior author's clinic visits. Concurrent validity of OSPRO-YF at either timepoint was assessed by comparing scores with PROs cross-sectionally using Pearson correlations and multiple comparison corrections.

Results

Preoperatively, higher OSPRO-YF total score was associated with greater concurrent PROMIS-CAT Pain Interference (r = 0.43; P < .01) and Depression (r = 0.36; P = .05) and lower ASES (r = -0.34; P < .01). Higher postoperative OSPRO-YF was also associated with greater concurrent PROMIS-CAT Pain Interference (r = 0.43; P < .01) and Depression (r = 0.36; P < .01) and lower ASES (r = -0.34; P = .01). ASES had strong correlation with Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation and Pain scores at both preoperative and postoperative timepoints. Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation was not significantly associated with OSPRO-YF total score or number of yellow flags at either timepoints.

Conclusion

The study findings support the clinical validity of the 10-item OSPRO-YF tool when administered before or after shoulder surgery. For patients exhibiting suboptimal recovery or those identified as high risk at initial screening, assessment of pain-related psychological distress postoperatively may be particularly beneficial in guiding rehabilitation.

Staged Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: Differing Results Comparing the First and Second Knees

BACKGROUND

Patients often prefer one knee over the other following staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA). Our study compared patient-reported outcomes scores of each knee following BTKA and identified factors that may contribute to the identified discrepancies.

METHODS

All patients who underwent staged BTKA between July 2014 and August 2022 were identified. The patient-reported outcomes were collected preoperatively and at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. Each knee's results were compared using paired t-tests and McNemar tests. Preoperative Kellgren-Lawrence Grade (KLG), postoperative range of motion (ROM), reoperation rates, and manipulations under anesthesia (MUAs) were collected. Results were stratified based on time between TKAs (< 3 months, 3 to 12 months, 1 to 2 years, and > 2 years).

RESULTS

There were 911 patients who underwent staged BTKA, with a mean 4.1-year follow-up. The ROM, patient satisfaction, MUAs, and reoperations were not significantly different between knees. Comparing the KLG of the first and second knees, 71% had the same KLG for both knees, 21% had a lower KLG, and 7% of the second knees had a higher KLG. The first knee had greater pain reduction (-10.6 at 2 weeks, -27.4 at 6 weeks) compared to the second (9.3 at 2 weeks, -8.1 at 6 weeks) (P < .0001) and better improvement in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR) score (8.5 at 2 weeks, 16.9 at 6 weeks) compared to the second (-5.8 at 2 weeks, 5.0 at 6 weeks) (P < .0001). The 1-year outcomes between first and second knees, or recovery curves, were not different when stratifying by time between TKAs.

CONCLUSIONS

The second knee in a staged BTKA has less delta improvement in KOOS JR and pain scores at early follow-up, likely due to higher starting KOOS JR and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores, despite similar final patient satisfaction and clinical outcome measures. Lower KLG in the second total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may contribute to these findings. An MUA after the first TKA is highly predictive of an MUA after the second TKA.

The Impact of Preoperative Medical Evaluation in an Orthopaedic Perioperative Medical Clinic on Total Joint Arthroplasty Outcomes: An Observational Study

BACKGROUND

A preoperative medical evaluation (PME) in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is routine despite considerable variation and uncertainty regarding its benefits. The orthopaedic department in our academic health system established a perioperative medical clinic (PMC) to standardize perioperative management and to study the effect of this intervention on total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) outcomes. This observational study compared the impact of a PME within 30 days prior to surgery at the PMC (Periop30) versus elsewhere ("Usual Care") on postoperative length of stay (LOS), extended LOS (i.e., a stay of >3 days), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 (PROMIS-10) Global Physical Health (GPH) score improvement in TJA.

METHODS

We stratified adult patients (≥18 years of age) who underwent primary TJA between January 2015 and December 2020 into Periop30 or Usual Care. We utilized univariate tests (a chi-square test for categorical variables and a t test for continuous variables) to assess for differences in patient characteristics. For both TKA and THA, LOS was assessed with use of multivariable negative binomial regression models; extended LOS, with use of binary logistic regression; and PROMIS-10 GPH score, with use of mixed-effects models with random intercept and slope. Interaction terms between the focal predictor (Periop30, yes or no) and year of surgery were included in all models.

RESULTS

Periop30 comprised 82.3% of TKAs (1,911 of 2,322 ) and 73.8% of THAs (1,876 of 2,541). For THA, the Periop30 group tended to be male (p = 0.005) and had a higher body mass index (p = 0.001) than the Usual Care group. The Periop30 group had a higher rate of staged bilateral THA (10.6% versus 7.5%; p = 0.028) and a lower rate of simultaneous bilateral TKA (5.1% versus 12.2%; p < 0.001) than the Usual Care group. Periop30 was associated with a lower mean LOS for both TKA (43.46 versus 54.15 hours; p < 0.001) and THA (41.07 versus 57.94 hours; p < 0.001). The rate of extended LOS was lower in the Periop30 group than in the Usual Care group for both TKA (15% versus 26.5%; p < 0.001) and THA (13.3% versus 27.4%; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in GPH score improvement between Periop30 and Usual Care for either TKA or THA.

CONCLUSIONS

Periop30 decreased mean LOS and the rate of extended LOS for TJA without an adverse effect on PROMIS-10 GPH scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Short-term Functional Outcomes and Complications of Custom Patellofemoral Arthroplasty

Background

Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) is a treatment option for isolated patellofemoral arthritis. Custom PFA is an innovative procedure utilizing patient-specific instrumentation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate short-term functional outcomes and complications of the custom PFA in treatment of isolated patellofemoral arthritis.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted to analyze patients who received a PFA operation from a single surgeon. Inclusion criteria were surgical patients from 2012 to 2018 who underwent PFA using a custom prosthesis implant. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) and Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) were collected before and after surgery.

Results

A total of 79 patients (94 knees) participated in the study; 55 (69.6%) were women. The median age was 57 at the time of index arthroplasty; 15 patients (30 knees) were bilateral. Follow-up rate was 94%. Median follow-up duration was 3.6 years (2-8.9). Overall prefunctional and postfunctional scores differed significantly for both KOOS, JR and LEFS. Postoperative scores increased for KOOS, JR by 27.5 points, and for LEFS, they increased 26.0 points; P < .001 for both. Complications included 6 reoperations (6.7%) related to PFA: 4 conversions (4.4%) to total knee arthroplasty at a median of 2.5 (1.5-3) years after the index procedure, one vastus medialis oblique advancement (1.1%) secondary to patellar maltracking, and one manipulation under anesthesia (1.1%).

Conclusions

Custom PFA in patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis showed good short-term functional outcomes and low revision rates with very few complications.

Do preoperative PROMIS scores independently predict 90-day readmission following primary total knee arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

The rising demand for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is expected to increase the total number of TKA-related readmissions, presenting significant public health and economic burden. With the increasing use of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores to inform clinical decision-making, this study aimed to investigate whether preoperative PROMIS scores are predictive of 90-day readmissions following primary TKA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of 10,196 patients with preoperative PROMIS scores who underwent primary TKA. Two comparison groups, readmissions (n = 79; 3.6%) and non-readmissions (n = 2091; 96.4%) were established. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were then performed with readmission as the outcome variable to determine whether preoperative PROMIS scores could predict 90-day readmission.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 2170 patients overall. Non-white patients (OR = 3.53, 95% CI [1.16, 10.71], p = 0.026) and patients with cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease (CVD) (OR = 1.66, 95% CI [1.01, 2.71], p = 0.042) were found to have significantly higher odds of 90-day readmission after TKA. Preoperative PROMIS-PF10a (p = 0.25), PROMIS-GPH (p = 0.38), and PROMIS-GMH (p = 0.07) scores were not significantly associated with 90-day readmission.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that preoperative PROMIS scores may not be used to predict 90-day readmission following primary TKA. Non-white patients and patients with CVD are 3.53 and 1.66 times more likely to be readmitted, highlighting existing racial disparities and medical comorbidities contributing to readmission in patients undergoing TKA.

Rasch Analysis of Joint Replacement Version for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome in Individuals With Advanced Osteoarthritis of Hip Awaiting Total Hip Arthroplasty Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine measurement properties of the Joint replacement version for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS-JR) using Rasch analysis in patients with osteoarthritis of hip (HOA).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional clinical measurement SETTING: Patient outcomes database at a tertiary care hospital PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sampling of patients with HOA scheduled for total hip arthroplasty (N=327) OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: The data for pre-surgery assessments for patients with HOA were extracted from an existing database. Variables extracted included HOOS-JR scores, demographic information (age, sex), health-related data, and anthropometric variables. The assumptions of Rasch model such as the test of fit, fit residuals, ordering of item thresholds, factor structure, DIF, internal consistency and Pearson separation index were examined for the HOOS-JR scores.

RESULTS

The HOOS-JR showed adequate overall fit to the Rasch model, logically ordered response thresholds, no floor or ceiling effects, and high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.91). The HOOS-JR did not satisfy the assumption of unidimensionality, albeit the violation of this assumption was marginal (6.12% over 5%). Person-item threshold distribution (difference between person and item means were equal to 0.92 which was less than 1 logit unit) confirmed that the HOOS-JR scores were well targeted.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that the violation of unidimensionality for HOOS-JR was marginal, we recommend further studies to validate this finding. Results broadly support the use of HOOS-JR for assessing hip health in patients with HOA.

Assessment of Patient Satisfaction and Outcomes After Outpatient Joint Arthroplasty in Academic Medical Centers

Background

There is limited literature evaluating patient satisfaction and outcomes after outpatient joint arthroplasty procedures in academic medical centers (AMCs). The aims of this study are to determine: (1) patients' desires to repeat their procedures and be discharged on the same day, (2) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), (3) time to discharge, (4) readmission rates, and (5) factors that predict PROMs in patients undergoing outpatient joint arthroplasty in AMCs.

Methods

A prospective survey was completed by 66 total hip arthroplasty (THA), 35 total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and 180 unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) outpatients who underwent surgery from May 2018 to December 2020 in 2 AMCs. The survey consisted of questions regarding hip or knee PROMs (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement), satisfaction with outpatient procedures and discharges, and reasons for readmissions. Linear regression analysis was conducted with statistical significance set at P < .05.

Results

100% of THA, 93.8% of TKA, and 93.0% of UKA outpatients stated that they would re-elect to undergo their respective procedure. Furthermore, 94% of THA, 81% of TKA, and 95% of UKA patients stated they would like same-day discharge again. THA, TKA, and UKA patients reported respective mean PROM scores of 94.7, 89.9, and 86.1. Readmission rates were 1.5%, 0.0%, and 0.5%, for THA, TKA, and UKA, respectively.

Conclusions

Patients who underwent outpatient joint arthroplasty procedures at 2 AMCs experienced minimal readmissions and reported a high desire to repeat their outpatient procedures.

Longitudinal Invariance Testing Of The Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score For Joint Replacement Scale (KOOS-JR)

Background

The Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) is a seven-item patient reported outcome measure used to assess perceived knee health. Though commonly used, the longitudinal psychometric properties of the KOOS-JR have not been established and further characterization of its structural validity and multi-group invariance properties is warranted.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate psychometric properties of the KOOS-JR in a large sample of patients who received care for knee pathology.

Study Design

Original research.

Methods

Longitudinal data extracted from the Surgical Outcome System (SOS) database of 13,470 knee pathology patients who completed the KOOS-JR at baseline, three-months, six- months, and one-year. Scale structure was assessed with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), while multi-group and longitudinal invariance properties were assessed with CFA-based procedures. Latent group means were compared with statistical significance set at α ≤ .05 and Cohen's d effect size as d = 0.2 (small), d = 0.5 (medium), and d = 0.8 (large).

Results

CFA results exceeded goodness-of-fit indices at all timepoints. Multi-group invariance properties passed test requirements. Longitudinal analysis identified a biased item resulting in removal of item #1; the retained six-item model (KOOS-JR-6) passed longitudinal invariance requirements. KOOS-JR-6 scores significantly changed over time (p ≤ .001, Mdiff = 1.08, Cohen's d = 0.57): the highest scores were at baseline examination and the lowest at 12-month assessment.

Conclusions

The KOOS-JR can be used to assess baseline differences between males and females, middle and older aged adults, and patients receiving total knee arthroplasty or non-operative care. Caution is warranted if the KOOS-JR is used longitudinally due to potential measurement error associated with item #1. The KOOS-JR-6 may be a more viable option to assess change over time; however, more research is warranted.

Level of Evidence

3© The Author(s).

Patient-reported outcomes for people with diabetes: what and how to measure? A narrative review

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.

The current utilization of the patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) in isolated or combined total knee arthroplasty populations

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential for clinical research and patient-centric care because they allow us to capture patient perspectives on their health condition. In knee arthroplasty, PROMs are frequently used to assess the risks and benefits of new interventions, surgical approaches, and other management strategies. A few examples of PROMs used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) include the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) (collectively referred to as "legacy" PROMs). More recently, attention has been brought to another PROM called the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). PROMIS was developed by the National Institute of Health (NIH) and has over 300 domains assessing various aspects of patient health, including pain, physical function, and mental health. With the use of PROMIS increasing in TKA literature, there is a need to review the advancements being made in understanding and applying PROMIS for this population. Thus, the purpose of this study is to provide insight on the utilization, advantages, and disadvantages of PROMIS within the field of knee arthroplasty and to provide a comparison to legacy PROMs.

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.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Supplementary Information

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

The performance of PROMIS computer adaptive testing for patient-reported outcomes in hip fracture surgery: a pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to patient-centered care in orthopaedics. PROMIS measures have demonstrated reliability, validity, responsiveness, and minimal floor and ceiling effects in various populations of patients receiving orthopaedic care but have not yet been examined in hip fracture patients. This pilot study sought to evaluate the psychometric performance of the PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS PF) and Pain Interference (PROMIS PI) computer adaptive tests and compare these instruments with legacy outcome measures in hip fracture patients.

METHODS

This study included 67 patients who were 27-96 years old (median 76) and underwent osteosynthesis for a proximal femoral fracture. At 3, 6, and/or 12 months follow-up, patients completed both legacy (mHHS, SF-36-PCS, and VAS for pain) and PROMIS questionnaires (PROMIS PF and PROMIS PI). Respondent burden and floor/ceiling effects were calculated for each outcome measure. Correlation was calculated to determine concurrent validity between related constructs.

RESULTS

A strong correlation was found between PROMIS PF and mHHS (rho = 0.715, p < 0.001) and moderately strong correlation between PROMIS PF and SF-36 PCS (rho = 0.697, p < 0.001). There was also a moderately strong correlation between the VAS and the PROMIS PI (rho = 0.641, p < 0.001). Patients who completed PROMIS PF were required to answer significantly fewer questions as compared with legacy PROMs (mHHS, SF-36). For the PROMIS measures, 1% of patients completing PROMIS PF achieved the highest allowable score while 34% of patients completing PROMIS PI achieved the lowest allowable score. Of the legacy outcome measures, 31% of patients completing the VAS for pain achieved the lowest allowable score and 7% of patients completing the mHHS achieved the highest allowable score.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the validity of PROMIS CATs for use in hip fracture patients. The PROMIS PF was significantly correlated with SF-36 PCS and mHHS while requiring fewer question items per patient relative to the legacy outcome measures.

Can minimal clinically important differences in patient reported outcome measures be predicted by machine learning in patients with total knee or hip arthroplasty? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review studies using machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict whether patients undergoing total knee or total hip arthroplasty achieve an improvement as high or higher than the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (classification problem).

METHODS

Studies were eligible to be included in the review if they collected PROMs both pre- and postintervention, reported the method of MCID calculation and applied ML. ML was defined as a family of models which automatically learn from data when selecting features, identifying nonlinear relations or interactions. Predictive performance must have been assessed using common metrics. Studies were searched on MEDLINE, PubMed Central, Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library. Study selection and risk of bias assessment (ROB) was conducted by two independent researchers.

RESULTS

517 studies were eligible for title and abstract screening. After screening title and abstract, 18 studies qualified for full-text screening. Finally, six studies were included. The most commonly applied ML algorithms were random forest and gradient boosting. Overall, eleven different ML algorithms have been applied in all papers. All studies reported at least fair predictive performance, with two reporting excellent performance. Sample size varied widely across studies, with 587 to 34,110 individuals observed. PROMs also varied widely across studies, with sixteen applied to TKA and six applied to THA. There was no single PROM utilized commonly in all studies. All studies calculated MCIDs for PROMs based on anchor-based or distribution-based methods or referred to literature which did so. Five studies reported variable importance for their models. Two studies were at high risk of bias.

DISCUSSION

No ML model was identified to perform best at the problem stated, nor can any PROM said to be best predictable. Reporting standards must be improved to reduce risk of bias and improve comparability to other studies.

Prospective, Single-blind, Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effectiveness of a Digital Exercise Therapy Application Compared With Conventional Physical Therapy for the Treatment of Nonoperative Knee Conditions

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness and adherence of a home exercise therapy program using a digital exercise therapy application (DETA) compared with conventional physical therapy (PT).

Design

Parallel group, randomized controlled trial.

Setting

Two clinics in a tertiary care academic center.

Participants

Participants (N=60) were enrolled within 1 week after a provider visit for knee pain. Inclusion criteria: age 18-75 years, knee pain diagnosis, and clinician-prescribed PT.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to complete either an 8-week intervention of conventional PT (enrolled n=29; complete n=26) or the DETA (enrolled n=31; completed n=24).

Main Outcome Measures

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference (PI) and Physical Function (PF) scores implemented via computer adaptive tests; number of exercise sessions completed per week (adherence).

Results

Compared with the PT group, the DETA group reported significant decreases in PROMIS-PI scores (−6.1±6.7 vs −1.5±6.6, P<.05, d=0.78) and increases in PROMIS-PF scores (6.0±6.6 vs −0.8±5.8, P<.01, d=0.89) after 8 weeks. No group differences in adherence were observed (P>.05).

Conclusions

Use of this DETA resulted in greater pain and functional improvements compared with PT, with no differences in adherence. It is possible this application may be a viable alternative to conventional PT in certain cases. A larger sample from various geographic locations is needed to improve generalizability and for subgroup analysis. Further investigation is warranted to determine the factors responsible for the differences observed between the groups.

Responsiveness of PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) Depression Scales in three clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The PROMIS depression scales are reliable and valid measures that have extensive normative data in general population samples. However, less is known about how responsive they are to detect change in clinical settings and how their responsiveness compares to legacy measures. The purpose of this study was to assess and compare the responsiveness of the PROMIS and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) depression scales in three separate samples.

METHODS

We used data from three clinical trials (two in patients with chronic pain and one in stroke survivors) totaling 651 participants. At both baseline and follow-up, participants completed four PROMIS depression fixed-length scales as well as legacy measures: Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item and 2-item scales (PHQ-9 and PHQ-2) and the SF-36 Mental Health scale. We measured global ratings of depression change, both prospectively and retrospectively, as anchors to classify patients as improved, unchanged, or worsened. Responsiveness was assessed with standardized response means, statistical tests comparing change groups, and area-under-curve analysis.

RESULTS

The PROMIS depression and legacy scales had generally comparable responsiveness. Moreover, the four PROMIS depression scales of varying lengths were similarly responsive. In general, measures performed better in detecting depression improvement than depression worsening. For all measures, responsiveness varied based on the study sample and on whether depression improved or worsened.

CONCLUSIONS

Both PROMIS and PHQ depression scales are brief public domain measures that are responsive (i.e., sensitive to change) and thus appropriate as outcome measures in research as well as for monitoring treatment in clinical practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01236521, NCT01583985, NCT01507688.

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

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information SystemⓇ (PROMISⓇ) is a dynamic system of psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. There has been a recent increase in the use of PROMIS measures, yet little has been written about the reporting of these measures in the field of orthopedics. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review to determine the uptake of PROMIS measures across orthopedics and to identify the type of PROMIS measures and domains that are most commonly used in orthopedic research and practice.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus using keywords and database-specific subject headings to capture orthopedic studies reporting PROMIS measures through November 2018. Our inclusion criteria were use of PROMIS measures as an outcome or used to describe a population of patients in an orthopedic setting in patients ≥ 18 years of age. We excluded non-quantitative studies, reviews, and case reports.

RESULTS

Our final search yielded 88 studies published from 2013 through 2018, with 57% (50 studies) published in 2018 alone. By body region, 28% (25 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the upper extremity (shoulder, elbow, hand), 36% (32 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the lower extremity (hip, knee, ankle, foot), 19% (17 studies) reported PROMIS measures in the spine, 10% (9 studies) reported PROMIS measures in trauma patients, and 6% (5 studies) reported PROMIS measures in general orthopedic patients. The majority of studies reported between one and three PROMIS domains (82%, 73 studies). The PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) approach was most commonly used (81%, 72 studies). The most frequently reported PROMIS domains were physical function (81%, 71 studies) and pain interference (61%, 54 studies).

CONCLUSION

Our review found an increase in the reporting of PROMIS measures over the recent years. Utilization of PROMIS measures in orthopedic populations is clinically appropriate and can facilitate communication of outcomes across different provider types and with reduced respondent burden.

REGISTRATION

The protocol for this systematic review was designed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and is registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42018088260).

Ten-Year Survivorship, Patient-Reported Outcomes, and Satisfaction of a Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine the 10-year survivorship and reasons for revision for a fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) design. In addition, we report on patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction and compare results of medial vs lateral compartment UKA and cemented vs cementless UKA with the same design.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study on a single-surgeon case series using a single fixed-bearing UKA design in 158 consecutive patients who underwent 177 UKA procedures between July 2000 and December 2010. Cases missing follow-up within the last year, clinically or via telephone, were excluded (n = 17, 10%). A cumulative incidence competing risk model was used to evaluate the cumulative incidence of failure.

RESULTS

Cumulative incidence of revision at a mean follow-up of 10 years was 13%. The majority of revisions (43%, 10/23) were for aseptic tibial component loosening, followed by progression of osteoarthritis (5/23, 22%). All Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures demonstrated mean T-scores within one standard deviation from the US population norm. The mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement was 96.9 (range, 40-100). The mean pain score was 3.8 (range, 0-8). Eighty-six percent of patients were satisfied with the UKA.

CONCLUSIONS

At 10-year follow-up, the most common causes for revision were aseptic tibial loosening and adjacent compartment knee arthroplasty, and similar results were found for medial vs lateral compartment and for cemented vs cementless UKA. Surgeons should consider these findings for future UKA designs, and this represents the first study reporting on survivorship and outcomes of this specific UKA design.

Performance of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System in Patients With Patellofemoral Instability

Background:

The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to improve patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and administration through a computer adaptive test (CAT). The PROMIS physical function-CAT (PF-CAT) has not been investigated in patients with patellofemoral instability (PFI).

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the construct validity of the PROMIS PF-CAT with previously validated tools for measuring PROMs in patients with a diagnosis of PFI. We hypothesized that the PF-CAT will have the strongest correlations with other PROMs that evaluated PF as well as moderate correlations with PROMs that measured other health domains.

Study Design:

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

Methods:

Patients enrolled in this study who underwent operative intervention for PFI completed the following evaluations preoperatively: PROMIS PF-CAT, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), and Kujala Anterior Knee Pain Scale (AKPS). Correlation coefficients and the percentage of patients achieving the highest and lowest possible outcome score of each instrument were calculated to assess floor and ceiling effects. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05.

Results:

In total, 91 participants (63.7% females; mean age, 20.1 ± 7.2 years) completed the questionnaires. PF-CAT had the lowest number of questions (4.3 ± 1.1). The strongest correlations were between the PF-CAT and SF-36 PF subscale (r = 0.78; P < .01), AKPS (r = 0.68; P < .01), and KOOS Activities of Daily Living subscale (r = 0.68; P < .01). Correlation was moderate between the PF-CAT and the KOOS subscales of Sports/Recreation (r = 0.58; P < .01), Quality of Life (r = 0.53; P < .01), and Symptoms (r = 0.47; P < .01). The PROMIS PF-CAT demonstrated no floor or ceiling effects.

Conclusion:

In patients with PFI, construct validity of the PROMIS PF-CAT was supported by strong correlations demonstrated between the PF-CAT and PROMs evaluating PF and moderate correlations with those assessing other health domains. Our results demonstrated a low respondent burden and no floor or ceiling effects associated with the PROMIS PF-CAT. The PROMIS PF-CAT may be considered a beneficial alternative to previously established PF PROMs for preoperative evaluation of patients with PFI.

The Effects of Bundled Payment Programs for Hip and Knee Arthroplasty on Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are essential to demonstrate the value of hip and knee arthroplasty, a common target for payment reforms. We compare patient-reported global and condition-specific outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasty based on hospital participation in Medicare's bundled payment programs.

METHODS

We performed a prospective observational study using the Comparative Effectiveness of Pulmonary Embolism Prevention after Hip and Knee Replacement trial. Differences in patient-reported outcomes through 6 months were compared between bundle and nonbundle hospitals using mixed-effects regression, controlling for baseline patient characteristics. Outcomes were the brief Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score or the brief Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health Score, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, measures of joint function, overall health, and pain, respectively.

RESULTS

Relative to nonbundled hospitals, arthroplasty patients at bundled hospitals had slightly lower improvement in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (-1.8 point relative difference at 6 months; 95% confidence interval -3.2 to -0.4; P = .011) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (-2.3 point relative difference at 6 months; 95% confidence interval -4.0 to -0.5; P = .010). However, these effects were small, and the proportions of patients who achieved a minimum clinically important difference were similar. Preoperative to postoperative change in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health Score and Numeric Pain Rating Scale demonstrated a similar pattern of slightly worse outcomes at bundled hospitals with similar rates of achieving a minimum clinically important difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving care at hospitals participating in Medicare's bundled payment programs do not have meaningfully worse improvements in patient-reported measures of function, health, or pain after hip or knee arthroplasty.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Comparison Based on Surgical Approaches

BACKGROUND

Comparisons of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) based on surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the United States are limited to series from single surgeons or institutions. Using prospective data from a large, multicenter study, we compare preoperative to postoperative changes in PROs between posterior, transgluteal, and anterior surgical approaches to THA.

METHODS

Patient-reported function, global health, and pain were systematically collected preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively from patients undergoing primary THA at 26 sites participating in the Comparative Effectiveness of Pulmonary Embolism Prevention After Hip and Knee Replacement (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02810704). Outcomes consisted of the brief Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health score, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. Operative approaches were grouped by surgical plane relative to the abductor musculature as being either anterior, transgluteal, or posterior.

RESULTS

Between 12/12/2016 and 08/31/2019, outcomes from 3018 eligible participants were examined. At 1 month, the transgluteal cohort had a 2.2-point lower improvement in Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (95% confidence interval, 0.40-4.06; P = .017) and a 1.3-point lower improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health score (95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.04; P = .002) compared to posterior approaches. There was no significant difference in improvement between anterior and posterior approaches. At 3 and 6 months, no clinically significant differences in PRO improvement were observed between groups.

CONCLUSION

PROs 6 months following THA dramatically improved regardless of the plane of surgical approach, suggesting that choice of surgical approach can be left to the discretion of surgeons and patients without fear of differential early outcomes.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Romanian knee disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint replacement (KOOSJR)

Aim

To perform validation of the Romanian Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOSJR).

Method

Ninety-six patients (101 knees) with advanced osteoarthritis (OA) scheduled for total knee replacement completed Romanian translations of KOOSJR and IKDC (International Knee Documentation Committee – subjective knee form) and Euroqol EQ-5D-5 L, and the treating physician completed the original knee society score (KSS).

Results

Average age was 66.4 (range 50–83) years and male to female ratio 1:3.76. There was moderate correlation between the test-retest (average 4 days) KOOSJR (r = 0.618, n = 45) and IKDC (r = − 0.671, n = 99), weak between KOOSJR and EQ-5D-5 L Index (r = − 0.431, n = 100) and VAS (r = − 0.364, n = 99) and very weak to KSS score (r = − 0.133, n = 98) and function (r = − 0.072, n = 97) For the first KOOSJR, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.816 and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.816 (95% CI 0.755–0.866) for average measures. For the retest, Cronbach’s alpha was 0.841 (95% CI 0.760–0.903) for averages.

Conclusion

The Romanian Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOSJR) is a valid, reliable, consistent and reproducible clinical score for patients with OA requiring arthroplasty.

PROMIS PF correlates with HOOS, JR in patients with hip pain

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly integrated into reporting requirements tied to reimbursement. There may be advantages to computer adaptive tests that apply to many different anatomical regions and diseases, provided that important information is not lost.

Questions

1) Does the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF) computer adaptive test correlate with the Hip injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR: a hip-specific PROM); 2) Is there any difference in the amount of variation explained by various factors (e.g. age, BMI, presence of concomitant knee pain) for both measures?

Methods

In this prospective, cross-sectional study of 213 patients, we assessed the Pearson correlation of PROMIS PF and HOOS, JR. To investigate the variation explained by various patient-level factors, we constructed two multivariable linear regression models.

Results

We found a large correlation between PROMIS PF and HOOS, JR (r 0.58, P < 0.001). Disabled or unemployed status was independently associated with both lower PROMIS PF and HOOS, JR scores (regression coefficient [β] -3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.8 to -1.0; P = 0.006 and β -11; 95% CI -17 to -5.0; P < 0.001, respectively). Private rather than public insurance was associated with both higher PROMIS PF and HOOS, JR scores (β 4.5; 95% CI 2.2 to 6.8; P < 0.001 and β 6.4; 95% CI 0.49 to 12; P = 0.034, respectively). No floor or ceiling effects were observed for PROMIS PF. HOOS, JR scores showed 4.2% floor and 0.5% ceiling effect.

Conclusions

This study adds to the evidence that general measures of physical limitations may provide similar information as joint- or region-specific measures.

Level of evidence

Level III.

Responsiveness of the PROMIS and its Concurrent Validity with Other Region- and Condition-specific PROMs in Patients Undergoing Carpal Tunnel Release

BACKGROUND

The Patient-reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) continues to be an important universal patient-reported outcomes measure (PROM) in orthopaedic surgery. However, there is concern about the performance of the PROMIS as a general health questionnaire in hand surgery compared with the performance of region- and condition-specific PROMs such as the Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) and the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ), respectively. To ensure that PROMIS domains capture patient-reported outcomes to the same degree as region- and condition-specific PROMs do, comparing PROM performance is necessary.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Which PROMs demonstrate high responsiveness among patients undergoing carpal tunnel release (CTR)? (2) Which of the PROMIS domains (Physical Function [PF], Upper Extremity [UE], and Pain Interference [PI]) demonstrate concurrent validity with the HHQ and BCTQ domains?

METHODS

In this prospective study, between November 2014 and October 2016, patients with carpal tunnel syndrome visiting a single surgeon who elected to undergo CTR completed the BCTQ, MHQ, and PROMIS UE, PF, and PI domains at each visit. A total of 101 patients agreed to participate. Of these, 31 patients (31%) did not return for a followup visit at least 6 weeks after CTR and were excluded, leaving a final sample of 70 patients (69%). We compared the PROMIS against region- and condition-specific PROMs in terms of responsiveness and concurrent validity. Responsiveness was determined using Cohen's d or the effect-size index (ESI). The larger the absolute value of the ESI, the greater the effect size. Using the ESI allows surgeons to better quantify the impact of CTR, with a medium ESI (that is, 0.5) representing a visible clinical change to a careful observer. Concurrent validity was determined using Spearman's correlation coefficient with correlation strengths categorized as excellent (> 0.7), excellent-good (0.61-0.70), good (0.4-0.6), and poor (< 0.4). Significance was set a priori at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Among PROMIS domains, the PI demonstrated the best responsiveness (ESI = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.39-1.08), followed by the UE (ESI = -0.66; 95% CI, -1.00 to -0.31). For the MHQ, the Satisfaction domain had the largest effect size (ESI = -1.48; 95% CI, -1.85 to -1.09), while for the BCTQ, the Symptom Severity domain had the best responsiveness (ESI = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.14-1.91). The PROMIS UE and PI domains demonstrated excellent-good to excellent correlations to the total MHQ and BCTQ-Functional Status scores (preoperative UE to MHQ: ρ = 0.68; PI to MHQ: ρ = 0.74; UE to BCTQ-Functional Status: ρ = 0.74; PI to BCTQ-Functional Status: ρ = 0.67; all p < 0.001), while the PROMIS PF demonstrated poor correlations with the same domains (preoperative PF to MHQ; ρ = 0.33; UE to BCTQ-Functional Status: ρ = 0.39; both p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The PROMIS UE and PI domains demonstrated slightly worse responsiveness than the MHQ and BCTQ domains that was nonetheless acceptable. The PROMIS PF domain was unresponsive. All three PROMIS domains correlated with the MHQ and BCTQ, but the PROMIS UE and PI domains had notably stronger correlations to the MHQ and BCTQ domains than the PF domain did. We feel that the PROMIS UE and PI can be used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing CTR, while also providing more robust insight into overall health status because they are general PROMs. However, we do not recommend the PROMIS PF for evaluating patients undergoing CTR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, diagnostic study.

Telerehabilitation for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Patients: A Pilot Series with High Patient Satisfaction

BACKGROUND

The demand for total hip and total knee arthroplasty in the USA is projected to increase significantly. Traditionally, face-to-face physical therapy has been an essential component of recovery in patients after total joint arthroplasty. Emerging technology allows telerehabilitation, or virtual physical therapy, which may reduce costs and increase standardization, but its effects on outcomes are not known.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSE

We sought to review our initial experience using a telerehabilitation protocol for patients after primary total hip or total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

In this pilot study, we retrospectively compared our first 40 telerehabilitation patients after a primary total hip or knee arthroplasty with a historical cohort or literature referenced values and evaluated (1) readmission rates at 90 days, (2) emergency department visits, (3) patient-reported outcome scores, (4) incidence of closed knee manipulation within 90 days of primary total knee arthroplasty, and (5) patient satisfaction surveys.

RESULTS

We observed no increase in the telerehabilitation group at 90 days in readmissions, emergency department visits, or closed knee manipulations. Accuracy of telerehabilitation exercises performed was 92%. Patient-reported outcome scores showed improvements comparable with traditional therapy. Extremely high patient satisfaction scores were reported with the telerehabilitation protocol.

CONCLUSION

Our early experience demonstrates the feasibility of implementing a telerehabilitation program following primary total hip or knee arthroplasty without compromising clinical quality and with high patient satisfaction.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function correlates with Toronto Extremity Salvage Score in an orthopaedic oncology population

BACKGROUND

The National Institute of Health's Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) uses computerised-adaptive testing to reduce survey burden and improve sensitivity. PROMIS is being used across medical and surgical disciplines but has not been studied in orthopaedic oncology.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The aim of the study was to compare PROMIS measures with upper extremity (UE) and lower extremity (LE) Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) by assessing the following: (1) responder burden, (2) correlation between scores and (3) floor/ceiling effects.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional trial analysed all 97 adult patients treated surgically for a bone or soft tissue tumour at a tertiary institution between November 2015 and March 2016. TESS (UE or LE) and PROMIS (Physical Function, Pain Interference and Depression) surveys were administered preoperatively. Pearson correlations between each PROMIS domain and TESS were calculated, as were floor/ceiling effects of each outcome measure.

RESULTS

(1) Completion of three PROMIS questionnaires required a mean total of 16.8 (+/- 5.8 standard deviation) questions, compared with 31 and 32 questions for the LE and UE TESS questionnaires, respectively. (2) The PROMIS Physical Function scores demonstrated a strong positive correlation with the LE TESS (r = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-0.91; p < 0.001) and moderate positive correlation with the UE TESS (r = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.34-0.83; p = 0.055). The PROMIS Depression scores demonstrated a weak negative correlation with both the LE TESS (r = -0.38; 95% CI, -0.61 to -0.10; p = 0.010) and with UE TESS (r = -0.38; 95% CI, -0.67 to -0.01; p = 0.055). The PROMIS Pain Interference scores demonstrated a strong negative correlation with the LE TESS (r = -0.71; 95% CI, -0.83 to -0.52; p < 0.001) and a moderate negative correlation with the UE TESS (r = -0.62; 95% CI, -0.81 to -0.30; p = 0.001). (3) The UE TESS had a range of scores from 16 to 100 with a 27% ceiling effect and no floor effect, and the LE TESS had a range from 10 to 98 with no floor or ceiling effect. There was no floor or ceiling effect for any PROMIS measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In an orthopaedic oncology population, the PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference scores correlate with the TESS and have the benefit of reduced survey burden and ceiling effect. The PROMIS Depression scores may provide additional information regarding patient outcomes not captured by the TESS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

THE TRANSLATIONAL POTENTIAL OF THIS ARTICLE

Patient reported outcome measures asses patients' symptoms, function and health-related quality of life and are designed to capture more clinical information than can be gathered by objective medial testing alone. As reimbursements and the understanding of patient outcomes are becoming tied to performance on PROMIS measures, it is an important step to establish how PROMIS measures correlate and compare to traditional legacy measures.

Changes in Discharge to Rehabilitation: Potential Unintended Consequences of Medicare Total Hip Arthroplasty/Total Knee Arthroplasty Bundled Payments, Should They Be Implemented on a Nationwide Scale?

BACKGROUND

As a part of the 2010 Affordable Care Act, Medicare was committed to changing 50% of its reimbursement to alternative payment models by 2018. One strategy included introduction of "bundled payments" or a fixed price for an episode of care. Early studies of the first operative bundles for elective total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) suggest changes in discharge to rehabilitation. It remains unclear the extent to which such changes affect patient well-being. In order to address these concerns, the objective of this study is to estimate projected changes in discharge to various type of rehabilitation, 90-day outcomes, extent of therapy received, and patient health-related quality-of-life before and after introduction of bundled payments should they be implemented on a nationwide scale.

METHODS

A nationwide policy simulation was conducted using decision-tree methodology in order to estimate changes in overt and patient-centered outcomes. Model parameters were informed by published research on bundled payment effects and anticipated outcomes of patients discharged to various types of rehabilitation.

RESULTS

Following bundled payment introduction, discharge to inpatient rehabilitation facilities decreased by 16.9 percentage-points (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.5-17.3) among primary TKA patients (THA 16.8 percentage-points), a relative decline from baseline of 58.9%. Skilled nursing facility use fell by 24.0 percentage-points (95% CI 23.6-24.4). It was accompanied by a 36.7 percentage-point (95% CI 36.3-37.2) increase in home health agency use. Although simulation models predicted minimal changes in overt outcome measures such as unplanned readmission (TKA +0.8 percentage-points), changes in discharge disposition were accompanied by significant increases in the need for further assistive care (TKA +8.0 percentage-points) and decreases in patients' functional recovery and extent of therapy received. They collectively accounted for a 30% reduction in recovered motor gains.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate substantial changes in discharge to rehabilitation with accompanying declines in average functional outcomes, extent of therapy received, and health-related quality-of-life. Such findings challenge notions of reduced cost at no harm previously attributed to the bundled payment program and lend credence to concerns about reductions in access to facility-based rehabilitation.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Romanian Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement

OBJECTIVE

Perform translation, cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Romanian translation of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS_JR).

DESIGN

Assess construct validity, reliability, internal consistency and reproducibility.

SETTING

Adults with chronic hip disability prior or at a minimum of 3 months after surgery.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-six patients (22 bilateral) with hip osteoarthritis or who had previous hip replacement or osteosynthesis for a fracture of the trochanteric region.

INTERVENTION

Complete the HOOS_JR together with the Oxford Hip Score (OHS_RO), Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Euroqol EQ-5D. 57 patients repeated the HOOS_JR after 2 days.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Convergent validity using Spearmans's correlation coefficient; Cronbach's alpha coefficient, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC, two-way mixed effects model) and inter-item correlation matrix and test-retest assessment after 2 days.

RESULTS

The questionnaire had a high degree of reliability with a Cronbach's α of 0.923 at the initial completion and 0.924 at the second testing. The ICC was 0.923 for average measures for the first form and 0.910 for the second form. The two results were strongly, positively and significantly correlated (rs = 0.859; P < 0.001). The Romanian HOOS_JR strongly, significantly and positively correlated with the OHS_RO (rs = -0.880 initial and rs = -0.803 s; P < 0.001) and HHS (rs = -0.731 initial and rs = -0.654 s; P < 0.001) and moderately, significantly and positively correlated with the EQ-5D Index (rs = -0.580 initial and rs = -0.542 s; P < 0.001) and VAS (rs = -0.500 initial and rs = -0.690 s; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The translated HOOS_JR is a reliable, reproducible and valid measure of function in patients with chronic hip disability.

KOOS-JR Demonstrates Psychometric Limitations in Measuring Knee Health in Individuals After ACL Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Measurement properties of the short form of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS-JR) are not established in individuals after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the KOOS-JR measures the construct of knee health in individuals post-ACLR using Rasch analysis.

HYPOTHESIS

The KOOS-JR will fit the Rasch model, but significant ceiling effects will be present.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

METHODS

Rasch analysis of the KOOS-JR from 166 individuals 10 months post-ACLR was conducted. Unidimensionality, a key criterion of the Rasch model, was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis. Model fit of the rating scale, items, and persons were evaluated. Mean square fit statistics ≥1.6 and standardized z-scores ≥2.0 were indicative of person or item misfit. Additionally, reliability indicators including person reliability and separation indices were examined.

RESULTS

The KOOS-JR fit the criteria of unidimensionality. All items demonstrated model fit; however, ceiling effects were noted (n = 36; 22%). Person reliability was low (0.47). Calculation of person strata revealed that the KOOS-JR did not separate participants into more than 1 stratum. The mean person measure was 3.56 logits higher than the mean item measure, indicating that this sample is skewed toward increased knee health.

CONCLUSION

Although the KOOS-JR represented a unidimensional construct with items and persons fitting the Rasch model, several limitations were noted: ceiling effects, low person reliability, and poor person differentiation. Ceiling effects indicate that many individuals in this sample experienced better knee health than the KOOS-JR items were able to measure.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Evaluating the measurement properties of the KOOS-JR is necessary to determine its clinical value in sports medicine. In later stages after ACLR recovery, administration of the KOOS-JR may not be adequate.

Early outcomes after revision total hip arthroplasty with a modern modular femoral revision stem in 65 consecutive cases

Background

We evaluated the early outcomes, including all-cause revisions, aseptic revisions, and reoperations after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a single modern modular femoral stem design.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study on a consecutive series of 62 patients (65 hips) who underwent revision THA with a modern modular femoral stem system, between January 2011 and October 2015, at a single academic medical center was performed. A cumulative incidence competing risk model was used to evaluate the cumulative incidence of failure with death as the competing risk.

Results

The cumulative incidence rate of all-cause revision THA was 14.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6%–24%) at 2 years when accounting for the competing risk of death. The rate of aseptic revisions was 6.8% (95% CI, 0.1%–13%), and the rate of all-cause reoperations was 21.6% (95% CI, 11%–31%). Ten THA cases (15%) underwent re-revision THA for any reason: five for infection and five for aseptic failures. The mean time to re-revision was 1 year (range, 0.04–5.34). Patients with a preoperative Mallory classification of 3 or more were at greater risk for reoperation (sub-hazard rate, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.54–9.53; P = .004).

Conclusions

Although the high incidence of reoperation illustrates the complexity of the revision THA population, particularly related to infection and joint instability, the relatively low rate of aseptic failures, minimal radiographic subsidence, and the lack of modular junctional failures suggest that the use of this modular revision THA system may provide adequate fixation and could be considered as a viable treatment option in the setting of revision THA.

Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions

OBJECTIVE

To examine minimum sample sizes and follow-up times required for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures (PMs) to achieve acceptable reliability as PMs.

PARTICIPANTS

We used 2 groups of patients age 65+ with at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions. The first was a sample of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, who reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline and 2 years. The second was a sample of primary care patients, who reported HRQoL at baseline and 6 months.

MEASURES

Medicare Advantage beneficiaries completed the Veterans RAND 12-Item Short Form (VR-12), while the primary care sample completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-Item Profile Measure (PROMIS-29). We constructed binary candidate PMs indicating stable or improved physical or mental HRQoL at follow-up, and continuous PMs measuring mean change over time.

RESULTS

In the Medicare Advantage sample, with a sample size per entity profiled of 160, the most promising PM achieved a reliability of 0.32 as a PM. A sample size of 882 per entity would have been needed for this PM to achieve an acceptable reliability of 0.7. In the prospective sample, with a sample size of 27 per clinic, the most promising PM achieved a reliability of 0.16 as a PM. A sample size of 341 patients (at the clinic level) would have been needed for this PM to achieve a reliability of 0.7.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving acceptable reliability for these PMs and conditions would have required minimum sample sizes of 341 at the clinic level or 880 at the health plan level. These estimates can guide the design of future patient-reported outcome-based PMs.

Timed Up and Go test is predictive of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function in patients awaiting total knee arthroplasty

Background

The Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) physical function rapidly assesses self-reported function capability. The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test is often used in clinical practice, but administration may be impeded by space and patient limitations. PROMIS CAT can potentially address these limitations, but we lack evidence if TUG and health indicators are predictors of PROMIS CAT. This study assessed whether TUG, body mass index (BMI), numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), and smoking status were predictors of PROMIS CAT in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) candidates.

Methods

Sixty-five TKA candidates completed the PROMIS CAT physical function test using an iPad application. TUG, NPRS, BMI, and smoking status were obtained at the clinic visit or from medical records. Univariate and multiple regression analyses identified the strongest predictors of PROMIS CAT.

Results

TUG was the best predictor of PROMIS CAT physical function based on simple regression (r = −0.43, 95% CI = −0.62 to −0.20) or multiple regression (βˆ = −0.45, 95% CI = −0.73 to −0.17) analyses. BMI and NPRS did not incrementally help predict the PROMIS score beyond TUG. Smoking status did not contribute to the prediction of the PROMIS CAT score.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that the PROMIS CAT physical function is not a surrogate for the TUG performance-based measure in candidates for TKA. However, TUG was the best predictor of PROMIS physical function compared with BMI, NPRS, and smoking status. Clinicians should consider both patient-reported and performance-based measures when evaluating function for TKA outcomes.

The Recovery Curve for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Patient-Reported Physical Function and Pain Interference Computerized Adaptive Tests After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

We sought to characterize the typical recovery in physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI) after TKA using Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures.

METHODS

Ninety-one patients were enrolled into an institutional review board -approved prospective observational study. PROs were obtained preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. PROs included the PROMIS PF computerized adaptive test (CAT) and the PROMIS PI CAT. Generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate outcomes over time.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the preoperative and 6-week postoperative T-scores for the PF CAT (P = .410). However, all subsequent postoperative T-scores were greater than the preoperative T-score (all, P < 0.05). There was a significant reduction in PI CAT T-scores between the preoperative and all subsequent postoperative T-scores (all, P < .05). A clinically important difference in PF CAT T-scores (β = 5.44, 95% confidence interval 4.10-6.80; P < .001) and PI CAT T-scores (β = -7.46, 95% confidence interval -9.52 to -5.40; P < 0.001) was seen between the preoperative and 3-month postoperative visits. Sixty-three percent of the improvement in PF occurred by 3 months, and 89% had occurred by 6 months. The majority of reduction in PI (68%) occurred by 3 months and 90% had occurred by 6 months.

CONCLUSION

The greatest magnitude of improvement in both PF and PI occurred within the first 3 months. After 6 months, patients might expect modest improvements in PF and mild reductions of PI. Patients and surgeons should use this information for setting expectations, planning for recovery, and improving care.

PROMIS and legacy measures compared in a supportive care intervention for breast cancer patients and caregivers: Experience from a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

Accurate and efficient measurement of patient-reported outcomes is key in cancer symptom management trials. The newer Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and previously developed measures of similar conceptual content (legacy) are available to measure symptoms and functioning. This report compares the performance of two sets of measures, PROMIS and legacy, in a recently completed trial of a supportive care intervention that enrolled breast cancer patients and their friend or family caregivers.

METHODS

Patient-caregiver dyads (N = 256) were randomized to either reflexology delivered by caregivers or usual care control. Post-intervention, PROMIS and legacy measures of symptoms and functioning were analyzed in relation to trial arm, while adjusting for baseline values. Responsiveness of the two sets of measures was assessed using effect sizes and P-values for the effect of trial arm on patients' and caregivers' symptom and functioning outcomes.

RESULTS

Similar conclusions about intervention effects were found using PROMIS and legacy measures for pain, fatigue, sleep, anxiety, physical, and social functioning. Different conclusions were obtained for patient and caregiver depression: legacy measures indicated the efficacy of reflexology, while PROMIS depression measure did not.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of similar responsiveness supports the use of either set of measures for symptoms and functioning in clinical and general populations. Differences between PROMIS and legacy measures of depression need to be considered when choosing instruments for use in trials of supportive care interventions and in clinical practice.

Establishing minimum clinically important difference values for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function, hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint reconstruction, and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint reconstruction in orthopaedics

AIM

To establish minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for measurements in an orthopaedic patient population with joint disorders.

METHODS

Adult patients aged 18 years and older seeking care for joint conditions at an orthopaedic clinic took the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS^® PF) computerized adaptive test (CAT), hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint reconstruction (HOOS JR), and the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint reconstruction (KOOS JR) from February 2014 to April 2017. MCIDs were calculated using anchor-based and distribution-based methods. Patient reports of meaningful change in function since their first clinic encounter were used as an anchor.

RESULTS

There were 2226 patients who participated with a mean age of 61.16 (SD = 12.84) years, 41.6% male, and 89.7% Caucasian. Mean change ranged from 7.29 to 8.41 for the PROMIS^® PF CAT, from 14.81 to 19.68 for the HOOS JR, and from 14.51 to 18.85 for the KOOS JR. ROC cut-offs ranged from 1.97-8.18 for the PF CAT, 6.33-43.36 for the HOOS JR, and 2.21-8.16 for the KOOS JR. Distribution-based methods estimated MCID values ranging from 2.45 to 21.55 for the PROMIS^® PF CAT; from 3.90 to 43.61 for the HOOS JR, and from 3.98 to 40.67 for the KOOS JR. The median MCID value in the range was similar to the mean change score for each measure and was 7.9 for the PF CAT, 18.0 for the HOOS JR, and 15.1 for the KOOS JR.

CONCLUSION

This is the first comprehensive study providing a wide range of MCIDs for the PROMIS^® PF, HOOS JR, and KOOS JR in orthopaedic patients with joint ailments.

Psychometric properties of the PROMIS Physical Function item bank in patients receiving physical therapy

OBJECTIVES

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is a universally applicable set of instruments, including item banks, short forms and computer adaptive tests (CATs), measuring patient-reported health across different patient populations. PROMIS CATs are highly efficient and the use in practice is considered feasible with little administration time, offering standardized and routine patient monitoring. Before an item bank can be used as CAT, the psychometric properties of the item bank have to be examined. Therefore, the objective was to assess the psychometric properties of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS Physical Function item bank (DF-PROMIS-PF) in Dutch patients receiving physical therapy.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

805 patients >18 years, who received any kind of physical therapy in primary care in the past year, completed the full DF-PROMIS-PF (121 items).

METHODS

Unidimensionality was examined by Confirmatory Factor Analysis and local dependence and monotonicity were evaluated. A Graded Response Model was fitted. Construct validity was examined with correlations between DF-PROMIS-PF T-scores and scores on two legacy instruments (SF-36 Health Survey Physical Functioning scale [SF36-PF10] and the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability-Index [HAQ-DI]). Reliability (standard errors of theta) was assessed.

RESULTS

The results for unidimensionality were mixed (scaled CFI = 0.924, TLI = 0.923, RMSEA = 0.045, 1th factor explained 61.5% of variance). Some local dependence was found (8.2% of item pairs). The item bank showed a broad coverage of the physical function construct (threshold-parameters range: -4.28-2.33) and good construct validity (correlation with SF36-PF10 = 0.84 and HAQ-DI = -0.85). Furthermore, the DF-PROMIS-PF showed greater reliability over a broader score-range than the SF36-PF10 and HAQ-DI.

CONCLUSIONS

The psychometric properties of the DF-PROMIS-PF item bank are sufficient. The DF-PROMIS-PF can now be used as short forms or CAT to measure the level of physical function of physiotherapy patients.