Agreement between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hip and knee replacement patients

Do Patients Accurately Recall Their Preoperative Symptoms After Elective Orthopedic Procedures?

Patient-reported outcome measures are a frequent tool used to assess orthopedic surgical outcomes. However, recall bias is a potential limitation of these tools when used retrospectively, as they rely on patients to accurately recall their preoperative symptoms. A database search of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline Ovid, and Scopus until May 2021 was completed in duplicate by two reviewers. Studies considered eligible for inclusion were those which reported on patient recall bias associated with orthopedic surgery. The primary outcome of interest investigated was the accuracy of patient recollection of preoperative health status. Any factors that were identified as affecting patient recall were secondary outcomes of interest. Of the 4,065 studies initially screened, 20 studies with 3,454 patients were included in the final analysis. Overall, there were 2,371 (69%) knee and hip patients, 422 (12%) shoulder patients, 370 (11%) spine patients, 208 (6%) other upper extremity patients, and 83 (2%) foot and ankle patients. Out of the eight studies that evaluated patient recall within three months postoperatively, seven studies concluded that patient recall is accurate. Out of the 13 studies that evaluated patient recall beyond three months postoperatively, nine studies concluded that patient recall is inaccurate. The accuracy of patient recall of preoperative symptoms after elective orthopedic procedures is not reliable beyond three months postoperatively.

Definitive Taylor Spatial Frame management for the treatment of high-energy open tibial fractures: Clinical and patient-reported outcomes

BACKGROUND

High energy open tibial fractures are complex injuries with no consensus on the optimal method of fixation. Treatment outcomes are often reported with union and re-operation rates, often without specific definitions being provided.  We sought to describe union, reoperation rates, and patient reported outcomes, using the validated EQ-VAS and Disability Rating Index (DRI) scores, following stabilisation with a Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) and a combined orthoplastic approach for the management of soft tissues. A literature review is also provided.

METHOD

A prospective cross-sectional follow up of open tibial fractures, treated at a level 1 major trauma centre, managed with a TSF using a one ring per segment technique between January 2014 and December 2019 were identified. Demographic, injury and operative data were recorded, along with Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) scores, specifically the EQ-VAS and Disability Rating Index (DRI). Union rates, defined by radiographic union scale in tibia (RUST) scores, and re-operation rates were recorded. Appropriate statistical analyses were performed, with a p<0.05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Overall, 51 patients were included. Mean age was 51.2 ± 17.4 years, with a 4:1 male preponderance. Diaphyseal and distal fractures accounted for 76% of cases. Mean time in frame was 206.7 ± 149.4 days. Union was defined and was achieved in 41/51 (80.4%) patients. Deep infection occurred in 6/51 (11.8%) patients. Amputation was performed in 1 case (1.9%). Overall re-operation rate was 33%. Time to union were significantly longer if re-operation was required for any reason (uncomplicated 204±189 vs complicated 304±155 days; p = 0.0017) . EQ-VAS and DRI scores significantly deteriorated at 1 year follow-up (EQVAS 87.5 ± 11.7 vs 66.5 ± 20.4;p<0.0001 and DRI 11.9 ± 17.8 vs 39.3 ± 23.3;p<0.0001). At 1 year post op, 23/51(45.1%) required a walking aid, and 17/29 (58.6%) of those working pre-injury had returned to work.

CONCLUSION

Open tibial fracture have significant morbidity and long recovery periods as determined by EQVAS and DRI outcome measures.  We report the largest series of open tibial feature treated primarily with a TSF construct, which has similar outcomes to other techniques, and should therefore be considered as a useful technique for managing these injuries.

High recall bias in retrospective assessment of the pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee Questionnaire (Pedi-IKDC) in children with knee pathologies

PURPOSE

The increasing incidence of knee injuries among children is well known by sports physicians. Papers dealing with this topic have often collected patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in a retrospective manner; this limitation could lead to a misinterpretation of the results, because pediatric patients might not remember their preoperative conditions adequately. This study aims to evaluate the reliability and the reproducibility of the IKDC pediatric score when administered retrospectively at a 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

From September 2018 and June 2019, all patients aged 7-18 scheduled for surgery due to different knee pathologies in a single center were considered eligible. Parents were contacted by phone for consent. An open-source platform was implemented to collect the responses: two surveys were created (Q1, Q2). They included general information and the Pedi-IKDC score. Q1 was completed prospectively, while Q2 was completed 12 months after surgery. The two questionnaires were identical, and patients were carefully advised to complete Q2 recalling their health status before surgery. ICC and the concordance correlation coefficient (ρ_c) were used to assess the reproducibility between the prospective and recalled scores.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients responded to Q1 and Q2, and the mean age was 12.9 ± 2.2 years at Q1 and 14.1 ± 2.2 years at Q2. The mean time between Q1 and Q2 was 14.1 ± 2.1 months. Between prospective-IKDC and recall-IKDC, the ICC coefficient was "poor" at 0.32 (CI 0.09 to 0.5) and the ρ_c was "poor" at 0.4 (CI 0.29 to 0.51). Mean prospective-IKDC was 76.8 ± 23.52 mean recalled-IKDC was 60.4 ± 11.5 (P < 0.0001), while mean difference was -16.3 ± 2.09. Simple linear regression models showed that Δ-IKDC is independently associated with age at Q1 (R² = 0.2676; P0.0001)  and prospective-IKDC (R² = 0.653; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Retrospective collection of the Pedi-IKDC score is not reliable and has high recall bias. This should be avoided in children with knee conditions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) trajectories after elective hip arthroplasty: a latent class and growth mixture analysis

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are an extensively used tool to assess and improve the quality of healthcare services. PROMs can be related to individual demographic and clinical characteristics in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty (HA). The aim of this study is to identify distinct subgroups of patients with unique trajectories of PROMS scores and to determine patients’ features associated with these subgroups.

Methods

We conducted a prospective, cohort study in which PROMs questionnaires (Euro Quality 5 Dimensions 3L, EQ-5D-3L, Euro-Quality-Visual-Analytic-Score, EQ-VAS, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, HOOS-PS) were administered to patients undergoing elective HA pre-operatively, and at 6 and 12 months after surgery. For each measure, latent class growth analysis and growth mixture models were used to identify subgroups of patients with distinct trajectories of scores. Demografic and clinical predictors of the latent classes in growth mixture model were identified using a 3-step approach.

Results

We found three distinct trajectories for each PROM score. These trajectories indicated a response heterogeneity to the HA among the patients (n = 991). Patient’s gender, ASA score, and obesity were significantly associated with different PROMs trajectories.

Conclusions

We identified three distinct trajectories for each of the three PROMs indicators. Several demographic and clinical characteristics are associated with the different trajectories of PROMs at 6 and 12 months after HA and could be used to identify groups of patients with different outcomes following HA surgery. These findings underline the importance of patient-centered care, supporting the usefulness of integrating PROMs data alongside routinely collected healthcare records for guiding clinical care and maximizing patients’ positive outcomes.

Trial registration: Protocol version (1.0) and trial registration data are available on the platform www.clinicaltrial.gov with the identifier NCT03790267, posted on December 31, 2018.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00503-5.

Patient Judgement of Change with Elective Surgery Correlates with Patient Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life

Obtaining pre-surgery PROM measures is not always feasible. The aim of this study was to examine if self-reports of change following elective surgery correlate with change scores from a validated PROM (15-item Quality of Recovery (QoR-15)). This cross-sectional study across 29 hospitals enrolled elective surgery patients. PROMs were collected one-week pre-surgery, as well as one- and four-weeks post-surgery via an electronic survey. We examined associations between patient “judgement of change” at one and four-weeks after surgery and the actual pre-to post-surgery PROM change scores. A total of 4177 surveys were received. The correlation between patient judgement of change, and the actual change score was moderately strong at one-week (n = 247, rs = 0.512, p < 0.001), yet low at four-weeks (n = 241, rs = 0.340, p < 0.001). Patient judgement was aligned to the direction of the PROM change score from pre- to post-surgery. We also examined the correlation between the QoR-15 (quality of recovery) and the EQ-5D-5L (QOL). There was a moderately strong positive correlation between the two PROMs (n = 356, rs = 0.666, p < 0.001), indicating that change in quality of recovery was related to change in QOL. These findings support the use of a single “judgement of change” recall question post-surgery.

Comparison of rehabilitation interventions in nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures: a randomized controlled trial of effectiveness

AIMS

Following cast removal for nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures, rehabilitation facilitated by advice leaflet and advice video were compared to a course of face-to-face therapy.

METHODS

Adults with an isolated, nonoperatively treated distal radius fracture were included at six weeks post-cast removal. Participants were randomized to delivery of rehabilitation interventions in one of three ways: an advice leaflet; an advice video; or face-to-face therapy session(s). The primary outcome measure was the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at six weeks post intervention and secondary outcome measures included DASH at one year, DASH work subscale, grip strength, and range of motion at six weeks and one year.

RESULTS

A total of 116 (97%) of 120 enrolled participants commenced treatment. Of those, 21 were lost to follow-up, resulting in 30 participants in the advice leaflet, 32 in the advice video, and 33 face-to-face therapy arms, respectively at six weeks of follow-up. There was no significant difference between the treatment groups in the DASH at six weeks (advice leaflet vs face-to-face therapy, p = 0.69; advice video vs face-to-face therapy, p = 0.56; advice leaflet vs advice video, p = 0.37; advice leaflet vs advice video vs face-to-face therapy, p = 0.63). At six weeks, there were no differences in any secondary outcome measures except for the DASH work subscale, where face-to-face therapy conferred benefit over advice leaflet (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Following cast removal for nonoperatively treated distal radius fractures, offering an advice leaflet or advice video for rehabilitation gives equivalent patient-reported outcomes to a course of face-to-face therapy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1033-1039.

Total Hip Arthroplasty: Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the Forgotten Joint Score 12

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is a valid patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess prosthesis awareness during daily activities after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) can be defined as the smallest change or difference that is evaluated as beneficial and could change the patient’s clinical management. The patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) is considered the minimum PROMs cut-off value that corresponds to a patient’s satisfactory state of health. Despite the validity and reliability of the FJS-12 having been already demonstrated, the MCID and the PASS of this score have not previously been defined. Patients undergoing THA from January 2019 to October 2019 were assessed pre-operatively and six months post-surgery using the FJS-12, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Pre-operative and follow-up questionnaires were completed by 50 patients. Both distribution-based approaches and anchor approaches were used to estimate MCID. The aim of this paper was to assess the MCID and PASS values of FJS-12 after total hip replacement. The FJS-12 MCID from baseline to 6 months post-operative follow-up was 17.5. The PASS calculated ranged from 69.8 to 91.7.

Comorbidities Associated With Poor Outcomes Following Operative Hammertoe Correction in a Geriatric Population

Background:

Although complications following hammertoe correction surgery are rare, older patients with comorbid conditions are often considered poorer operative candidates compared with younger, healthier patients because of a suspected increased risk of adverse outcomes. The aim of this study was to determine if the presence of multiple comorbidities was associated with increased complications or unsuccessful patient-reported outcomes following operative hammertoe correction in geriatric patients.

Methods:

Prospectively collected data was reviewed on 78 patients aged 60 years or older who underwent operative correction of hammertoe deformity. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and postoperative complications were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale for pain and Short Form Health Survey Physical and Mental Component Summary with 1 year of follow-up. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on number of comorbidities (0 or 1 vs > 2) and then compared. The average age of patients was 69.4 years and the prevalence of comorbidities in the study population was as follows: 11.5% smokers, 25.6% on blood thinners, 15.4% with rheumatoid arthritis, 7.7% with diabetes mellitus, 2.6% with peripheral arterial disease, 6.4% with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 11.5% with coronary artery disease, and 23.1% with osteoporosis.

Results:

Fifty-three patients (67.9%) had 0 or 1 comorbidity and 25 (32.1%) had 2 or more comorbidities. Compared to the 0 or 1 comorbidity group, the presence of multiple comorbidities was associated with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) for superficial wound infection of 4.18 (P = .045) and deformity recurrence requiring surgery OR of 23.15 (P = .032). Patient-reported outcomes were similar between comorbidity groups.

Conclusions:

This study further informs foot and ankle specialists to maintain increased surveillance for postoperative complications and unsuccessful outcomes in patients with multiple comorbidities. Although geriatric patients still report significant improvements in both pain and function, patients with underlying medical conditions should be counseled about their increased risks when pursuing operative hammertoe correction.

Level of Evidence:

Level III, retrospective comparative series.

Patient-reported outcomes in young patients with isolated fracture of the hip

AIMS

Hip fractures in patients < 60 years old currently account for only 3% to 4% of all hip fractures in England, but this proportion is increasing. Little is known about the longer-term patient-reported outcomes in this potentially more active population. The primary aim is to examine patient-reported outcomes following isolated hip fracture in patients aged < 60 years. The secondary aim is to determine an association between outcomes and different types of fracture pattern and/or treatment implants.

METHODS

All hip fracture patients aged 18 to 60 years admitted to a single centre over a 15-year period were used to identify the study group. Fracture pattern (undisplaced intracapsular, displaced intracapsular, and extracapsular) and type of operation (multiple cannulated hip screws, angular stable fixation, hemiarthroplasty, and total hip replacement) were recorded. The primary outcome measures were the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), and EQ-visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Preinjury scores were recorded by patient recall and postinjury scores were collected at a mean of 57 months (9 to 118) postinjury. Ethics approval was obtained prior to study commencement.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were included. There was a significant difference in pre- and post-injury OHS (mean 9.8 point reduction (38 to -20; p < 0.001)), EQ-5D (mean 0.208 reduction in index (0.897 to -0.630; p < 0.001)), and VAS , and VAS (mean 11.6 point reduction (70 to -55; p < 0.001)) Fracture pattern had a significant influence on OHS (p < 0.001) with extracapsular fractures showing the least favourable long-term outcome. Fixation type also impacted significantly on OHS (p = 0.011) with the worst outcomes in patients treated by hemiarthroplasty or angular stable fixation.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant reduction in function and quality of life following injury, with all three patient-reported outcome measures used, indicating that this is a substantial injury in younger patients. Treatment with hemiarthroplasty or angular stable devices in this cohort were associated with a less favourable hip score outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):766-771.

Conventional and retrospective change in health-related quality of life of trauma patients: an explorative observational follow-up study

Background

Within trauma care measurement of changes in health-related quality of life (HRQL) is used in understanding patterns of recovery over time. However, conventionally-measured change in HRQL may not always reflect the change in HRQL as perceived by the patient. Recall bias and response shift may contribute to disagreement between conventional and retrospective change in HRQL. This study aimed to measure conventional and retrospective change of HRQL and assess to which extent recall bias and response shift contribute to disagreement between these two in a heterogeneous sample of adult trauma patients.

Methods

A sample of trauma patients (≥18 years) who attended the Emergency Department and were admitted to an Intensive Care unit or ward of one of ten Dutch hospitals received postal questionnaires 1 week (T1) and 3 months (T2) post-injury. At T1 and T2 participants completed the EQ-5D-3 L and EQ-VAS for their current health status. At T2 participants also filled out a recall and then-test regarding their health status at T1. The responses were used to assess conventional and retrospective change, recall bias and response shift. Wilcoxon signed rank tests were used to examine conventional and retrospective change on a group level. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to examine individual agreement between conventional and retrospective change. Uni- and multivariate linear regression analysis were used to investigate the association between background factors and recall bias and response shift.

Results

The EQ-5D-3 L, recall and then-test were completed by 550 patients. Mean EQ-5D-3 L summary score improved from 0.48 at T1 to 0.74 at T2. Mean EQ-VAS score improved from 56 at T1 to 73 at T2. Retrospective change was significantly higher than conventional change (EQ-5D-3 L: Z = -5.2, p < 0.05; EQ-VAS Z = -2.1, p < 0.05). Pairwise comparisons showed that agreement between conventional and retrospective change was fair (EQ-5D-3 L: ICC = 0.49; EQ-VAS: ICC = 0.48). For EQ-5-3 L response shift was significantly higher than recall bias (Z = − 4.5, p < 0.05). Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), severe injury and/or posttraumatic stress symptoms were more susceptible to recall bias and response shift.

Conclusions

We conclude that, compared to recall bias, response shift contributed more to the disagreement between conventional and retrospective change in EQ-5D-3 L summary score and EQ-VAS. Predictable subgroups of trauma patients were more susceptible to recall bias and response shift.

Can Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) from Population Surveys Provide Accurate Estimates of Pre-Admission Health Status of Emergency Hospital Admissions?

INTRODUCTION

The use of PROs for assessing the outcomes of emergency hospital admissions requires a means of estimating patients' pre-admission health status. A possible alternative to asking patients to recall how their health was before the incident causing admission is to use estimates derived from matched samples from population surveys. Our aims were to explore the impact of different methods of matching and to compare the results with estimates based on retrospective reporting.

METHODS

First, elective hip arthroplasty patients were matched to respondents to the General Practice Patient Survey using age, sex, socio-economic status and number of comorbidities. The impact of restricting matching for locality and specific co-morbidities was explored. Second, the best matching method was applied to emergency admissions for laparotomy and for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after acute myocardial infarction. Data were stratified by patient characteristics. Differences in mean EQ-5D scores between the patients and matched population respondents were tested using t tests.

RESULTS

Modifying the most basic form of matching by also taking locality and the specific comorbid conditions into account made no significant difference to the mean EQ-5D score for hip arthroplasty patients. Even using the most detailed matching possible, patients' mean EQ-5D score was significantly different to that of the general population for all three cohorts. The difference was greatest for elective hip arthroplasty (0.22 v 0.64), less so for emergency laparotomy (0.56 v 0.72) and least for PCI (0.79 v 0.71). This reflects hip arthroplasty patients having a long-standing condition characterised by pain and limited mobility, whereas the other two cohorts may have enjoyed reasonable health until an unexpected acute episode led to their emergency admission.

CONCLUSION

Routine PRO data acquired from population surveys cannot be used as an accurate alternative to retrospectively reported PROMs by patients during their emergency admission episode.

Agreement between retrospectively assessed health-related quality of life collected 1 week and 12 months post-injury: an observational follow-up study

Background

Retrospective assessment of pre-injury health-related quality of life (HRQL) is frequently used to measure change from pre- to post-injury HRQL. However, retrospective measurement may be confounded by recall bias. It is assumed that presence of recall bias is influenced by several factors, such as the measurement scale or the instrument that is used, the measurement schedule, and the presence of a substantial health event during the follow up period. This study empirically tests these assumptions by comparing pre-injury EQ-5D summary scores, EQ-5D profiles and visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) scores of trauma patients, as recorded 1 week and 12 months post-injury, respectively.

Methods

A sample of 5371 adult trauma patients who attended the Emergency Department (ED) followed by hospital admission, received postal questionnaires 1 week (T1) and 12 months (T2) post-injury. The questionnaires contained items on pre-injury health, in terms of EQ-5D3L and EQ-VAS.

Results

One thousand one hundred sixty-six completed data pairs with T1 and T2 pre-injury data were available. Mean pre-injury EQ-5D summary scores were 0.906 (T1) and 0.905 (T2), respectively, with moderate intertemporal agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) T1T2 = 0.595). In absolute terms, 442 (37.9%) respondents reported a different pre-injury EQ-5D profile at T2 compared to T1. The least stable EQ-5D dimension was pain/discomfort (20.2% reported a change). Mean T2 pre-injury EQ-VAS score was significantly higher than mean T1 pre-injury EQ-VAS score (T2 84.6 versus T1 83.3). Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that lower educational level, comorbid disease and having PTSD symptoms were independent predictors of change of pre-injury EQ-5D profile.

Conclusions

Despite one third of respondents reported a different pre-injury health level, if asked for on two interview occasions separated by 1 year, on the group level this difference was nil (EQ-5D summary score) to small (EQ-VAS). The consistent symmetrical pattern of change suggests random error to play the largest role. Intertemporal reliability was the same in EQ-5D profiles vs. EQ-VAS scores, ruling out scale effects. Particularly certain trauma subgroups showed highest distortion. While group comparisons may be trusted, in pre-post analysis and repeated measure analysis the individual injury impact and recovery pattern may be wrongly estimated.

Using patient-reported outcome measures for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Introduction

Routine measurement of the outcome of myocardial infarction is usually limited to immediate morbidity and mortality. Our aim was to determine the response to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) 3 months later, identify response bias and explore the feasibility of comparing outcome with their recalled view of their prior health state.

Methods

Patients admitted with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) to five percutaneous coronary intervention centres were invited to complete a retrospective questionnaire containing the EQ-5D-3L and short form Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-7). Response rate for a 3-month mailed follow-up questionnaire and potential response biases were assessed. Patients' outcomes were compared with their baseline using χ2 and paired t-test to assess for differences.

Results

Of 392 patients contacted, 260 (66.3%) responded. Responders were more likely to be older, female, more affluent and have a higher EQ-5D at baseline. Three months after surgery, patients' SAQ-7 and angina symptom subscale returned to their baseline score. The physical limitation subscale score was worse than at baseline (79.9 vs 73.2, p=0.002), whereas the quality-of-life subscale was better (66.6 vs 73.9; p<0.001). The EQ-5D-3L index score was similar at 3 months to baseline (0.82 vs 0.79). Evidence of bias arising from responders being in better general health at baseline needs further investigation and, if confirmed, needs to be taken into account in interpreting PROMs data.

Conclusion

It is feasible to use PROMs routinely to assess the impact of emergency admissions of patients with STEMI. A larger demonstration project with more sites is needed to confirm these findings.

Feasibility of collecting retrospective patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in emergency hospital admissions

INTRODUCTION

Outcome of emergency admissions is usually limited to mortality with little attempt to capture the views of health status of survivors. This is because of the challenge of determining patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for the period before their emergency admission. The aim was to assess the feasibility of collecting retrospective PROMs to capture the pre-admission health status of patients admitted as emergencies.

METHODS

Prospective study of two cohorts: patients undergoing primary coronary angioplasty for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in five hospitals and emergency laparotomy (EL) for gastro-intestinal conditions in 11 hospitals. Three rates were calculated: proportion of patients eligible for inclusion; proportion of eligible patients invited to participate; proportion of invitees who participated. Staff views were thematically analysed to understand factors that affected recruitment.

RESULTS

About 85% of patients were eligible of whom most were invited to participate (84% EL; 79% STEMI). The proportions of invitees agreeing to participate differed between STEMI (92%) and EL (72%), probably reflecting greater post-intervention morbidity in the latter. Variation between hospitals was observed in the proportion deemed eligible (EL 72-97%; STEMI 63-100%), proportion invited (EL 60-93%; STEMI 71-96%) and the proportion of invitees agreeing to participate (EL 55-92%; STEMI 67-100%). While this might reflect case-mix differences between hospitals, it suggests there is scope for less well performing hospitals to improve their recruitment processes. The extent to which this initial feasibility study was able to assess selection bias was limited to the age and sex of patients. There was no bias evident for EL patients but for STEMI, younger men were more likely to participate.

CONCLUSION

It appears to be feasible to collect retrospective PROMs from patients admitted unexpectedly as emergencies for the two conditions studied. The relevance of these findings to other causes of emergency admissions needs to be established. In addition, these findings justify the case for a large, multi-site study that could explore unresolved concerns about selection bias, particularly those arising from the clinical characteristics of patients. It would also enable estimates of the extent of variation in PROMs between hospitals to determine the usefulness of using PROMs in emergency admissions.

Feasibility of collecting and assessing patient-reported outcomes for emergency admissions: laparotomy for gastrointestinal conditions

INTRODUCTION

Audit of emergency surgery is usually limited to immediate clinical outcomes relating to outcomes during the acute hospital episode with little attempt to capture patients' views of their longer-term outcomes. Our aim was to determine the response rate to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients who underwent an emergency laparotomy for gastrointestinal conditions, identify response bias and explore the feasibility of comparing outcomes with their prior health based on their recalled view collected during their admission.

METHODS

Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy in 11 hospitals were recruited to complete a retrospective questionnaire containing the EQ-5D-3L and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI). Response rate for 3-month mailed follow-up questionnaire and potential response biases were assessed. Patients' outcomes were compared with their baseline using χ2 and paired t-test to assess for differences.

RESULTS

Of 255 patients contacted at 3 months, 190 (74.1%) responded. Responders were more likely to be older, female and more affluent. Patients' health improved significantly as regards the GIQLI (93.3 vs 97.9; p=0.048) and the subscale on symptoms (51.9 vs 59.6; p<0.001). No significant change in subscales on emotion or physical aspects or for overall health status (EQ-5D: 0.58 vs 0.64; p=0.06). According to the social subscale, patients had deteriorated (11.0 vs 9.8; p<0.0006). Differences in change scores by patient characteristics were slight, suggesting minimal response bias.

CONCLUSION

This approach offers the opportunity for assessing the impact of treatment, from the patient's perspective and the potential to evaluate emergency laparotomy care using PROMs.