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

Providing evidence for content validity of the most frequently used hip specific recovery outcome measures in hip fracture studies: an International Classification of Functioning approach

PURPOSE

We established the most commonly used clinician and patient-reported hip fracture outcome measures as of 2022, assessed their content validity using an International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework, and operationalized these results to contribute to an updated hip fracture core set.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted to identify articles utilizing outcome measures related to hip fracture. A total of five outcome measures were identified, linked to the ICF, and assessed for content validity via bandwidth percent, content density, and content diversity.

RESULTS

Outcome measures were linked to 191 ICF codes, most of which were associated with Activities and Participation. Notably, no outcome measure contained concepts linked to Personal Factors and Environmental Factors were underrepresented across all outcome measures. The modified Harris Hip Score had the highest content diversity (0.67), the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score had the highest bandwidth of ICF content coverage (2.48), and the Oxford Hip Score had the highest content density (2.92).

CONCLUSIONS

These results clarify the clinical applicability of outcome measures and guide development of hip fracture outcomes that allow providers to assess the complex role of social, environmental, and personal factors in patient rehabilitation.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHip fracture is a complex and disabling pathology predominantly affecting older adults and represents a public health problem.There are a variety of outcome measures used to assess a patient's recovery following a hip fracture, each with distinctive objectives and modes of administration.Content validity metrics associated with the Harris Hip Score suggest it would be a suitable outcome measure during early-stage recovery, whereas the modified Harris Hip Score may be more suitable for tracking long-term recovery tracking.Choosing an outcome measure most appropriate for a hip fracture patient is an individualized decision that must consider aspects such as age, activity level, needs, and environmental factors.

Changes Over a Decade in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty

Background

When used appropriately, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) provides a powerful tool for identifying meaningful improvements brought about by a given treatment, offering more clinically relevant information than frequentist statistical analysis. However, recent studies have shown inconsistent derivation methods and use of MCIDs. The goal of this study was to report the rate of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and MCIDs use in the literature and assess how this rate has changed over time.

Methods

All articles published in 2010 and 2020 reporting on total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty in The Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and The Journal of Arthroplasty were reviewed. In each reviewed article, every reported PROM and, if present, its corresponding MCID was recorded. These data were used to calculate the rate of reporting of each PROM and MCID.

Results

While the total number of articles on total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty reporting PROMs increased over time, the proportion of articles reporting PROMs decreased from 49.8% (131/263) in 2010 to 35.5% (194/546) in 2020 (P = .011). Of these articles that report PROMs, the proportion of articles reporting any MCID increased from 2.3% (3/131) in 2010 to 16.5% (32/194) in 2020 (P = .002).

Conclusions

The rate of reporting of MCIDs among articles relating to total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty that report PROMs has increased significantly between 2010 and 2020 but remains low. Continued emphasis on appropriate inclusion and value of MCIDs when PROMS are reported in clinical outcomes studies is needed.

Comparing early and mid-term outcomes between robotic-arm assisted and manual total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

The projected increase in utilization rates of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has created an emphasis on novel technologies that can aid providers in maintaining historically positive outcomes. Widespread utilization of robotic assisted THA (RA-THA) is contingent upon achieving favorable outcomes compared to its traditional manual counterpart (mTHA). Therefore, the purpose of our systematic review was to compare RA-THA and mTHA in terms of the following: (1) functional outcomes and (2) complication rates. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were searched for articles published October 1994 and May 2021 comparing functional outcomes and complication rates between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. When three or more studies evaluated certain PROMs and complications, a pooled analysis utilizing Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models was conducted utilizing data from final follow-up. Our final analysis included 18 studies which reported on a total of 2811 patients [RA-THA: n = 1194 (42.48%); mTHA: n = 1617 (57.52%)]. No significant differences were demonstrated for a majority of pooled analyses and when segregating by robotic system. Only WOMAC scores were significantly lower among RA-THA patients (p = 0.0006). For outcomes without sufficient data for a pooled analysis, there were no significant differences reported among included studies. The growing utilization of RA-THA motivates comparisons to its manual counterpart. Collectively, we found comparable functional outcomes and complication profiles between RA-THA and mTHA cohorts. More randomized controlled trials of higher quality and larger sample sizes are necessary to further strengthen these findings.

Association of global sagittal spinal deformity with functional disability two years after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The relationship between spinopelvic alignment and functional disability after total hip arthroplasty (THA) has not been fully elucidated despite the growing recognition of its importance on patient-reported outcome measures. Therefore, our aim was to assess the effect of global sagittal spinal deformity on post-operative disability.

METHODS

This analysis was based on 208 cases of THA, with functional disability measured at a follow-up of 2 years. The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR), ranging from a scale of 0 (complete joint disability) to 100 (perfect joint health), was used to divide eligible patients into two groups, namely with and without disability, using a score of 70 as the cut-off. The following factors were compared between the two groups using multivariate analysis: age, sex, body height, body mass index, spinopelvic parameters, and surgeon experience. To identify the cut-off value of the parameters for predicting disability (HOOS-JR < 70/100), we used the receiver-operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

The disability (30 hips) and control (178 hips) groups showed a significant difference in pre-operative body height (p = 0.020), T1 pelvic angle divided by pelvic incidence (T1PA/PI; p = 0.018), PI minus lumbar lordosis (p = 0.027), post-operative HOOS-JR (p = 0.010), patient satisfaction (p = 0.033), and the modified Harris Hip Score (p = 0.038). On multivariate analysis, the following factors were associated with persistent disability: T1PA/PI > 0.2 (odds ratio [OR], 2.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-4.14; p <  0.001) and height < 148 cm equivalent to legal standards as short stature (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09-1.48; p = 0.011). The cut-off value of pre-operative T1PA/PI was > 0.19, with a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 85%. Post-operative satisfaction (p <  0.001), HOOS-JR (p = 0.023), and EuroQol 5-Dimension (p = 0.041) differed between the two groups when the pre-operative cut-off value was chosen as 0.2.

CONCLUSIONS

A T1PA/PI > 0.2 was associated with greater disability after THA. Clinicians should be aware that patient-related factors, including global spinal deformities, particularly in patients with a short stature, can influence THA outcomes at 2 years postoperatively.