Is There an Association Between Negative Patient-Experience Comments and Perioperative Outcomes After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

What is measured matters: A scoping review of analysis methods used for qualitative patient reported experience measure data

INTRODUCTION

Hospitals are increasingly turning to patients for valuable feedback regarding their care experience. A common method to collect this information is patient reported experience measures (PREMs) surveys. Health care workers report qualitative PREMs as more interesting, relevant, and informative than quantitative survey responses. However, a major barrier to utilising qualitative PREMs data to drive quality improvements is a lack of resources to analyse the data. This scoping review aimed to review the methods used to analyse qualitative PREMs survey data from routine hospital care.

METHODS

We utilised the JBI scoping review methodology, and searched four databases for articles from 2013 to 2023 which analysed qualitative PREMs survey data from routine care in hospitals. Study characteristics were extracted, as well as the analysis method - specifically, whether the study used traditional manual analysis methods in which the researcher reads the text and categorise the data, or automated methods utilising computers and algorithms to read and categorise the data.

RESULTS

From 960 unique articles, 123 went through full-text review and 54 were deemed eligible. 75.9 % used only manual content analysis methods to analyse the qualitative responses, 16.7 % of studies used a combination of manual and automated methods, and only 7.4 % used exclusively automated methods. Automated methods were used in 27.5 % of studies published 2019-2023, compared to 14.3 % of studies published 2013-2018. All bar one study using automated methods focused on investigating the validity of the automated methodology or used it to complement manual content analysis.

CONCLUSION

The studies included in this review show a transition from traditional time-consuming manual analyses to computerised methods enabling analysis at a larger scale. As the volume of PREMs data collected grows, efficient and effective ways to analyse qualitative PREMs data at scale are required to enable health services to capture the patient voice and drive consumer-centred improvements in care.

Analgesic efficacy of adding the IPACK block to multimodal analgesia protocol for primary total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a standard treatment for end-stage degenerative knee disease. Most patients will experience moderate-to-severe postoperative knee pain, significantly affecting rehabilitation. However, controversy remains regarding the efficacy of adding the interspace between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee (IPACK) into multimodal analgesia protocol.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and other databases were searched from inception to February 1, 2021. Studies comparing patients receiving IPACK to patients not receiving IPACK were included. The primary outcome was the ambulation pain score on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0-10. Secondary outcomes included pain score at rest, morphine usage, functional recovery, clinical outcomes, and complications.

RESULTS

Thirteen RCTs involving 1347 knees were included. IPACK was associated with lower ambulation pain scores (weight mean difference [WMD] - 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 0.72 to - 0.26). The benefits were observed from 2 to 4 h, 6 to 12 h, and beyond one week. IPACK also significantly reduced rest pain scores (WMD - 0.49, 95% CI - 0.74 to - 0.24), and the benefits were observed from 6 to 12 h and beyond one week. IPACK reduced the overall morphine consumption (WMD - 2.56, 95% CI - 4.63 to - 0.49). Subgroup analysis found reduced oral morphine consumption from 24 to 48 h (WMD - 2.98, 95% CI - 5.71 to - 0.24) and reduced rate of morphine requirement from 12 to 24 h (relative risk [RR] = 0.51, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.83). Functional recovery outcomes regarding ambulation distances (on the second postoperative day [POD2]) (WMD = 1.74, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.15) and quadriceps muscle strength (at 0 degree) (WMD = 0.41, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.77) favored IPACK. And IPACK reduced the rate of sleep disturbance (on POD 1) (RR = 0.39, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.81). There was no significant difference in the other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-level evidence confirmed that IPACK was related to better results in pain scores, morphine usage, and functional recovery without increasing the risk of complications.

REGISTRATION

CRD42021252156.

The Forgotten Joint Score patient-acceptable symptom state following primary total hip arthroplasty

Aims

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) tool designed to assess artificial prosthesis awareness during daily activities following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) is the minimum cut-off value that corresponds to a patient’s satisfactory state-of-health. Despite the validity and reliability of the FJS-12 having been previously demonstrated, the PASS has yet to be clearly defined. This study aims to define the PASS of the FJS-12 following primary THA.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary elective THA from 2019 to 2020, and answered both the FJS-12 and the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR) questionnaires one-year postoperatively. HOOS, JR score was used as the anchor to estimate the PASS of FJS-12. Two statistical methods were employed: the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve point, which maximized the Youden index; and 75th percentile of the cumulative percentage curve of patients who had the HOOS, JR score difference larger than the cut-off value.

Results

This study included 780 patients. The mean one-year FJS-12 score was 65.42 (SD 28.59). The mean one-year HOOS, JR score was 82.70 (SD 16.57). A high positive correlation between FJS-12 and HOOS, JR was found (r = 0.74; p<0.001), making the HOOS, JR a valid external anchor. The threshold score of the FJS-12 that maximized the sensitivity and specificity for detecting a PASS was 66.68 (area under the curve = 0.8). The cut-off score value computed with the 75th percentile approach was 92.20.

Conclusion

The PASS threshold for the FJS-12 at one year following primary THA was 66.68 and 92.20 using the ROC curve and 75th percentile approaches, respectively. These values can be used to achieve consensus about meaningful postoperative improvement to maximize the utility of the FJS-12 to evaluate and counsel patients undergoing THA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(4):307–313.

Comparing ERAS-outpatient versus standard-inpatient hip and knee replacements: a mixed methods study exploring the experience of patients who underwent both

BACKGROUND

Optimizing patients' total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) experience is as crucial for providing high quality care as improving safety and clinical effectiveness. Yet, little evidence is available on patient experience in standard-inpatient and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)-outpatient programs. Therefore, this study aimed to gain a more in-depth understanding of the patient experience of ERAS-outpatient programs in comparison to standard-inpatient programs.

METHODS

We conducted a convergent mixed methods study of 48 consecutive patients who experienced both standard-inpatient and ERAS-outpatient THA/TKA contralaterally. A reflective thematic analysis was conducted based on data collected via a questionnaire. Bivariate correlations between the patient experience and patients' characteristics, clinical outcomes and care components satisfaction were performed. Then, the quantitative and qualitative data were integrated together.

RESULTS

The theme Support makes the difference for better and for worse was identified by patients as crucial to their experience in both joint replacement programs. On the other hand, patients identified 3 themes distinguishing their ERAS-outpatient from their standard-inpatient experience: 1) Minimizing inconvenience, 2) Home sweet home and 3) Returning to normal function and activities. Potential optimization expressed by patients were to receive more preoperative information, additional postoperative rehabilitation sessions, and ensuring better coherence of care between hospital and home care teams. Weak to moderate positive and statistically significant correlations were found between patients' THA/TKA experience and satisfaction with pain management, hospital stay, postoperative recovery, home care, and overall results (rs = + [0.36-0.66], p-value < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Whatever the perioperative program, the key to improving patients' THA/TKA experience lies in improving support throughout the care episode. However, compared to standard-inpatient care, the ERAS-outpatient program improves patients' experience by providing dedicated support in postoperative care, reducing postoperative inconvenience, optimizing pain management, returning home sooner, and recovering and regaining function sooner. Patients' THA/TKA experience could further be enhanced by optimizing the information provided to the patient, the rehabilitation program and the coherence between care teams.

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.