Collection and Reporting of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Arthroplasty Registries: Multinational Survey and Recommendations

Measurement Properties of the Oxford Shoulder Score and Minimal Clinically Important Changes After Primary Total Shoulder Replacement Surgery

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the measurement properties of the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and estimated the minimal clinically important change (MCIC) in patients undergoing primary total shoulder replacement in Australia.

METHODS

Deidentified data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry were used for this analysis. Pre- and 6-month postoperative OSS scores were used, with the 5-level EuroQoL quality of life instrument and shoulder pain scores used as comparators. Floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness to change were evaluated using standard psychometric methods. Mean change and predictive modeling approaches (with and without adjustment for the proportion of improved patients) were used to calculate MCIC thresholds, with patient-perceived improvement after surgery as the anchor.

RESULTS

Preoperative OSS data were available for 1,117 patients (59% female; 90% aged ≥60 years) undergoing primary total shoulder replacement. No floor or ceiling effects were observed pre- or postoperatively. The OSS showed high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha >0.89), good construct validity, and high responsiveness to change (effect size 1.88). The MCIC derived from the mean change method was 6.50 points (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.41-8.61). The predictive modeling approach produced an MCIC estimate of 8.42 points (95% CI 5.68-12.23) after adjustment.

CONCLUSION

The OSS has good measurement properties to capture pain and function outcomes after shoulder replacement procedures and is highly responsive to change. Based on robust methods, an increase in OSS scores of at least eight points can be considered as meaningful improvement after surgery from the patient's perspective.

Comparison of Responsiveness of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of different patient-reported outcome measures in patients with primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, we assessed patients with TKA before the surgery, after 4 months, after 1 year, and after 2 years. Measures were the objective Knee Society Score (KSS) and the following patient-reported outcome measures: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), KOOS-12, Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), High-Activity Arthroplasty Score, and EQ-5D-3L. Responsiveness was determined by effect size (ES), standardized response mean (SRM), area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, floor and ceiling effects, and hypothesis testing.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 309 TKAs (272 patients, 56% female). The ES and SRM for the change in KSS, KOOS, KOOS-12, FJS-12, and EQ-5D-3L from baseline to each follow-up were large (>0.8). The largest responsiveness from baseline to follow-up was found for the KSS, KOOS/KOOS-12 quality of life, KOOS-12 summary, KOOS-12 pain, and FJS-12 (2.0 > ES <3.9, 1.4 > SRM <2.4). The area under the curve from baseline to each follow-up was ≥0.7 for KOOS, KOOS-12, and FJS-12 (range 0.71 to 0.95) and <0.7 for KSS and EQ-5D-3L (range 0.65 to 0.74). We found floor or ceiling effects in the KOOS, KOOS-12, and EQ-5D-3L, but not in the KSS, FJS-12, and High-Activity Arthroplasty Score.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that responsiveness differed between the various measures. The KOOS-12 and FJS-12 showed the greatest internal and external responsiveness, although ceiling effects occurred in the KOOS-12.

How to Raise the Bar in the Capture of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: Results from Active and Passive Follow-up Measures

BACKGROUND

With the upcoming U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2027 policy for mandatory reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA or TKA), it is important to evaluate the resources required to achieve adequate PROM collection and reporting at a clinically relevant rate of follow-up. This study aimed to (1) determine follow-up rates for 1-year PROMs when the follow-up was conducted with active methods (attempted contact by staff) and passive (automated) methods, and (2) evaluate factors associated with higher odds of requiring active follow-up or being lost to follow-up following THA or TKA.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of patients undergoing primary elective THA (n = 7,436) or TKA (n = 10,119) between January 2016 and December 2020 at a single institution were included. The primary outcome was the response rate achieved with active and passive follow-up methods at our institution. Patient characteristics, health-care utilization parameters, PROM values, and patient satisfaction were compared between follow-up methods.

RESULTS

Passive and active measures were successful for 38% (2,859) and 40% (3,004) of the THA cohort, respectively, while 21% (1,573) were lost to follow-up. Similarly, passive and active measures were successful for 40% (4,001) and 41% (4,161) of the TKA cohort, respectively, while 20% (2,037) were lost to follow-up. Younger age, male sex, Black or another non-White race, fewer years of education, smoking, Medicare or Medicaid insurance, and specific baseline PROM phenotypes (i.e., with scores in the lower half for pain, function, and/or mental health) were associated with loss to follow-up. Older age, male sex, Black race, and a residence with a higher Area Deprivation Index were associated with requiring active follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

One of 5 patients were lost to follow-up despite active and passive measures following THA or TKA. These patients were more likely to be younger, be male, be of Black or another non-White race, have fewer years of education, be a smoker, have Medicaid insurance, and have specific baseline PROM phenotypes. Innovative strategies aimed at targeting individuals with these baseline characteristics may help raise the bar and increase follow-up while mitigating costs after total joint arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Hip-specific and generic patient-reported outcome measure scores after primary hip replacement are associated with early revision surgery: a national registry study

BACKGROUND

The ability to efficiently identify patients at higher risk of poor outcomes after joint replacement would enable limited resources for post-operative follow-up to be directed to those with the greatest clinical need. This is particularly important as joint replacement rates continue to grow internationally, stretching health system capabilities. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are routinely administered in many settings and offer an opportunity to detect suboptimal patient outcomes early. This study aimed to determine whether hip-specific and generic PROM scores are associated with early revision hip replacement within six to 24 months after the primary procedure.

METHODS

Pre-operative and six-month post-operative PROM scores for patients undergoing primary total hip replacement (THR) were obtained from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry and Arthroplasty Clinical Outcomes Registry National and linked to revision surgery data. Clinically important improvement was defined using anchor-based thresholds. Associations between PROM scores (hip pain, Oxford Hip Score, HOOS-12, EQ-5D-5L, EQ VAS, patient-perceived change, satisfaction) and revision surgery were evaluated using t-tests, chi-square tests and regression models.

RESULTS

Data were analysed for 21,236 primary THR procedures between 2013 and 2022. Eighty-eight revision procedures were performed at six to 24 months. Patients who were revised had more back pain and worse HOOS-12 scores pre-operatively but between-group differences were small. Worse post-operative PROM scores (hip pain, Oxford, HOOS-12, EQ-5D-5L, EQ VAS) were associated with early revision, after adjusting for age and sex (p < 0.001 for all analyses). Patient dissatisfaction (relative risk (RR) 10.18, 95%CI 6.01-17.25) and patient-perceived worsening (RR 19.62, 95%CI 11.33-33.98) were also associated with a higher likelihood of revision. Patients who did not achieve clinically important improvement in hip pain, function, or quality of life had a higher revision risk (RRs 2.54-5.64), compared with those who did (reference).

CONCLUSION

Six-month hip-specific and generic PROM scores can identify patients at higher risk of early revision surgery. Our data highlight the utility of routine post-operative PROM assessment for signaling suboptimal surgical outcomes.

First knee for pain and function versus second knee for quality of life

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe and compare joint-specific and generic health-related quality of life outcomes of the first versus second knee in patients undergoing staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) for osteoarthritis.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used Australian national arthroplasty registry data from January 2013 to January 2021 to identify participants who underwent elective staged BTKA with six to 24 months between procedures. The primary outcome was Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at six months postoperatively for the first TKA compared to the second TKA, adjusted for age and sex. Secondary outcomes compared six-month EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) domain scores, EQ-5D index scores, and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) between knees at six months postoperatively.

Results

The cohort included 635 participants (1,270 primary procedures). Preoperative scores were worse in the first knee compared to the second for all instruments; however, comparing the first knee at six months postoperatively with the second knee at six months postoperatively, the mean between-knee difference was minimal for OKS (-0.8 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.4 to -0.2), EQ-VAS (3.3; 95% CI 1.9 to 4.7), and EQ-5D index (0.09 points; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.12). Outcomes for the EQ-5D-5L domains 'mobility', 'usual activities', and 'pain/discomfort' were better following the second TKA.

Conclusion

At six months postoperatively, there were no clinically meaningful differences between the first and second TKA in either the joint-specific or overall generic health-related quality of life outcomes. However, individual domain scores assessing mobility, pain, and usual activities were notably higher after the second TKA, likely reflecting the cumulative improvement in quality of life after both knees have been replaced.

Using Unsupervised Machine Learning to Predict Quality of Life After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are an important metric to assess total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. The purpose of this study was to use a machine learning (ML) algorithm to identify patient features that impact PROMs after TKA.

METHODS

Data from 636 TKA patients enrolled in our patient database between 2018 and 2022, were retrospectively reviewed. Their mean age was 68 years (range, 39 to 92), 56.7% women, and mean body mass index of 31.17 (range, 16 to 58). Patient demographics and the Functional Comorbidity Index were collected alongside Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System Global Health v1.2 (PROMIS GH-P) physical component scores preoperatively, at 3 months, and 1 year after TKA. An unsupervised ML algorithm (spectral clustering) was used to identify patient features impacting PROMIS GH-P scores at the various time points.

RESULTS

The algorithm identified 5 patient clusters that varied by demographics, comorbidities, and pain scores. Each cluster was associated with predictable trends in PROMIS GH-P scores across the time points. Notably, patients who had the worst preoperative PROMIS GH-P scores (cluster 5) had the most improvement after TKA, whereas patients who had higher global health rating preoperatively had more modest improvement (clusters 1, 2, and 3). Two out of Five patient clusters (cluster 4 and 5) showed improvement in PROMIS GH-P scores that met a minimally clinically important difference at 1-year postoperative.

CONCLUSIONS

The unsupervised ML algorithm identified patient clusters that had predictable changes in PROMs after TKA. It is a positive step toward providing precision medical care for each of our arthroplasty patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Young or Old Age and Non-White Race Are Associated With Poor Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Response Compliance After Orthopaedic Surgery

Purpose

To investigate orthopaedic patient compliance with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and identify factors that improve response rates.

Methods

Our search strategy comprised a combination of key words and database-specific subject headings for the concepts of orthopaedic surgical procedures, compliance, and PROMs from several research databases from inception to October 11, 2022. Duplicates were removed. A total of 97 studies were included. A table was created for the remaining articles to be appraised and analyzed. The collected data included study characteristics, follow-up/compliance rate, factors that increase/decrease compliance, and type of PROM. Follow-up/compliance rate was determined to be any reported response rate. The range and average used for analysis was based on the highest or lowest number reported in the specific article.

Results

The range of compliance reported was 11.3% to 100%. The overall response rate was 68.6%. The average baseline (preoperative/previsit) response rate was 76.6%. Most studies (77%) had greater than 50% compliance. Intervention/reminder of any type (most commonly phone call or mail) resulted in improved compliance from 44.6% to 70.6%. Young and elderly non-White male patients had the lowest compliance rate. When directly compared, phone call (71.5%) resulted in a greater compliance rate than electronic-based (53.2%) or paper-based (57.6%) surveys.

Conclusions

The response rates for PROMs vary across the orthopaedic literature. Patient-specific factors, such as age (young or old) and race (non-White), may contribute to poor PROM response rate. Reminders and interventions significantly improve PROM response rates.

Clinical Relevance

PROMs are important tools in many aspects of medicine. The data generated from these tools not only provide information about individual patient outcomes but also make hypothesis-driven comparisons possible. Understanding the factors that affect patient compliance with PROMs is vital to our accurate understanding of patient outcomes and the overall advancement of medical care.

Clinical investigations to evaluate high-risk orthopaedic devices: a systematic review of the peer-reviewed medical literature

Purpose

The objective of this systematic review was to give an overview of clinical investigations regarding hip and knee arthroplasty implants published in peer-reviewed scientific medical journals before entry into force of the EU Medical Device Regulation in May 2021.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the medical literature for a random selection of hip and knee implants to identify all peer-reviewed clinical investigations published within 10 years before and up to 20 years after regulatory approval. We report study characteristics, methodologies, outcomes, measures to prevent bias, and timing of clinical investigations of 30 current implants. The review process was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

Results

We identified 2912 publications and finally included 151 papers published between 1995 and 2021 (63 on hip stems, 34 on hip cups, and 54 on knee systems). We identified no clinical studies published before Conformité Européene (CE)-marking for any selected device, and no studies even up to 20 years after CE-marking in one-quarter of devices. There were very few randomized controlled trials, and registry-based studies generally had larger sample sizes and better methodology.

Conclusion

The peer-reviewed literature alone is insufficient as a source of clinical investigations of these high-risk devices intended for life-long use. A more systematic, efficient, and faster way to evaluate safety and performance is necessary. Using a phased introduction approach, nesting comparative studies of observational and experimental design in existing registries, increasing the use of benefit measures, and accelerating surrogate outcomes research will help to minimize risks and maximize benefits.

Overcoming floor and ceiling effects in knee arthroplasty outcome measurement

Aims

To map the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and High Activity Arthroplasty Score (HAAS) items to a common scale, and to investigate the psychometric properties of this new scale for the measurement of knee health.

Methods

Patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) data measuring knee health were obtained from the NHS PROMs dataset and Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial (TOPKAT). Assumptions for common scale modelling were tested. A graded response model (fitted to OKS item responses in the NHS PROMs dataset) was used as an anchor to calibrate paired HAAS items from the TOPKAT dataset. Information curves for the combined OKS-HAAS model were plotted. Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare common scale scores derived from OKS and HAAS items. A conversion table was developed to map between HAAS, OKS, and the common scale.

Results

We included 3,329 response sets from 528 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty. These generally met the assumptions of unidimensionality, monotonicity, local independence, and measurement invariance. The HAAS items provided more information than OKS items at high levels of knee health. Combining both instruments resulted in higher test-level information than either instrument alone. The mean error between common scale scores derived from the OKS and HAAS was 0.29 logits.

Conclusion

The common scale allowed more precise measurement of knee health than use of either the OKS or HAAS individually. These techniques for mapping PROM instruments may be useful for the standardization of outcome reporting, and pooling results across studies that use either PROM in individual-patient meta-analysis.

Remote Symptom Monitoring With Ecological Momentary Computerized Adaptive Testing: Pilot Cohort Study of a Platform for Frequent, Low-Burden, and Personalized Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

BACKGROUND

Remote patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) data capture can provide useful insights into research and clinical practice and deeper insights can be gained by administering assessments more frequently, for example, in ecological momentary assessment. However, frequent data collection can be limited by the burden of multiple, lengthy questionnaires. This burden can be reduced with computerized adaptive testing (CAT) algorithms that select only the most relevant items from a PROM for an individual respondent. In this paper, we propose "ecological momentary computerized adaptive testing" (EMCAT): the use of CAT algorithms to reduce PROM response burden and facilitate high-frequency data capture via a smartphone app. We develop and pilot a smartphone app for performing EMCAT using a popular hand surgery PROM.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to determine the feasibility of EMCAT as a system for remote PROM administration.

METHODS

We built the EMCAT web app using Concerto, an open-source CAT platform maintained by the Psychometrics Centre, University of Cambridge, and hosted it on an Amazon Web Service cloud server. The platform is compatible with any questionnaire that has been parameterized with item response theory or Rasch measurement theory. For this study, the PROM we chose was the patient evaluation measure, which is commonly used in hand surgery. CAT algorithms were built using item response theory models derived from UK Hand Registry data. In the pilot study, we enrolled 40 patients with hand trauma or thumb-base arthritis, across 2 sites, between July 13, 2022, and September 14, 2022. We monitored their symptoms with the patient evaluation measure, via EMCAT, over a 12-week period. Patients were assessed thrice weekly, once daily, or thrice daily. We additionally administered full-length PROM assessments at 0, 6, and 12 weeks, and the User Engagement Scale at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The use of EMCAT significantly reduced the length of the PROM (median 2 vs 11 items) and the time taken to complete it (median 8.8 seconds vs 1 minute 14 seconds). Very similar scores were obtained when EMCAT was administered concurrently with the full-length PROM, with a mean error of <0.01 on a logit (z score) scale. The median response rate in the daily assessment group was 93%. The median perceived usability score of the User Engagement Scale was 4.0 (maximum possible score 5.0).

CONCLUSIONS

EMCAT reduces the burden of PROM assessments, enabling acceptable high-frequency, remote PROM data capture. This has potential applications in both research and clinical practice. In research, EMCAT could be used to study temporal variations in symptom severity, for example, recovery trajectories after surgery. In clinical practice, EMCAT could be used to monitor patients remotely, prompting early intervention if a patient's symptom trajectory causes clinical concern.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN 19841416; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN19841416.

Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring to Improve Quality of Life After Joint Replacement: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Although remote patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) monitoring has shown promising results in cancer care, there is a lack of research on PROM monitoring in orthopedics.

Objective

To determine whether PROM monitoring can improve health outcomes for patients with joint replacement compared with the standard of care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A 2-group, patient-level randomized clinical trial (PROMoting Quality) across 9 German hospitals recruited patients aged 18 years or older with primary hip or knee replacement from October 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020, with follow-up until March 31, 2022.

Interventions

Intervention and control groups received the standard of care and PROMs at hospital admission, discharge, and 12 months after surgery. In addition, the intervention group received PROMs at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Based on prespecified PROM score thresholds, at these times, an automated alert signaled critical recovery paths to hospital study nurses. On notification, study nurses contacted patients and referred them to their physicians if necessary.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The prespecified outcomes were the mean change in PROM scores (European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level version [EQ-5D-5L; range, -0.661 to 1.0, with higher values indicating higher levels of health-related quality of life (HRQOL)], European Quality of Life Visual Analogue Scale [EQ-VAS; range, 0-100, with higher values indicating higher levels of HRQOL], Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform [HOOS-PS; range, 0-100, with lower values indicating lower physical impairment] or Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform [KOOS-PS; range, 0-100, with lower values indicating lower physical impairment], Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-fatigue [range, 33.7-75.8, with lower values indicating lower levels of fatigue], and PROMIS-depression [range, 41-79.4, with lower values indicating lower levels of depression]) from baseline to 12 months after surgery. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis.

Results

The study included 3697 patients with hip replacement (mean [SD] age, 65.8 [10.6] years; 2065 women [55.9%]) and 3110 patients with knee replacement (mean [SD] age, 66.0 [9.2] years; 1669 women [53.7%]). Exploratory analyses showed significantly better health outcomes in the intervention group on all PROMs except the EQ-5D-5L among patients with hip replacement, with a 2.10-point increase on the EQ-VAS in the intervention group compared with the control group (HOOS-PS, -1.86 points; PROMIS-fatigue, -0.69 points; PROMIS-depression, -0.57 points). Patients in the intervention group with knee replacement had a 1.24-point increase on the EQ-VAS, as well as significantly better scores on the KOOS-PS (-0.99 points) and PROMIS-fatigue (-0.84 points) compared with the control group. Mixed-effect models showed a significant difference in improvement on the EQ-VAS (hip replacement: effect estimate [EE], 1.66 [95% CI, 0.58-2.74]; knee replacement: EE, 1.71 [95% CI, 0.53-2.90]) and PROMIS-fatigue (hip replacement: EE, -0.65 [95% CI, -1.12 to -0.18]; knee replacement: EE, -0.71 [95% CI, -1.23 to -0.20]). The PROMIS-depression score was significantly reduced in the hip replacement group (EE, -0.60 [95% CI, -1.01 to -0.18]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, the PROM-based monitoring intervention led to a small improvement in HRQOL and fatigue among patients with hip or knee replacement, as well as in depression among patients with hip replacement.

Trial registration

Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien ID: DRKS00019916.

What Factors Identified in Initial Osteoarthritis Management Are Associated With Poor Patient-reported Outcomes After THA? A Register-based Study

BACKGROUND

Some patients report long-term pain or no improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) or are dissatisfied after THA. However, factors associated with these poorer patient-reported outcomes after surgery are inconsistent and have typically been studied in the late phase of hip osteoarthritis (OA) among patients already eligible for surgery. Earlier identification of risk factors would provide time to address modifiable factors, helping to improve patients' pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction after surgery and reduce the burden on orthopaedic clinics by referring patients who are better prepared for surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We analyzed data from patients with hip OA referred to a first-line OA intervention program in primary healthcare at a stage when they had not been referred for THA, and asked: (1) What percentage of patients who proceed to THA report lack of improvement in pain, lack of improvement in HRQoL as measured by the EQ-5D, or are not satisfied with surgery 1 year after THA? (2) What associations exist between baseline factors at referral to this first-line OA intervention program and these poorer patient-reported outcomes 1 year after THA?

METHODS

We included 3411 patients with hip OA (mean age 67 ± 9 years, 63% [2160 of 3411] women) who had been referred for first-line OA interventions between 2008 and 2015 and subsequently underwent THA for OA. All patients were initially identified through the Swedish Osteoarthritis Register, which follows and evaluates patients in a standardized national first-line OA intervention program. Then, we identified those who were also registered in the Swedish Arthroplasty Register with a THA during the study period. We included only those with complete patient-reported outcome measures for pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively, representing 78% (3411 of 4368) of patients, who had the same baseline characteristics as nonrespondents. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the associations between 14 baseline factors and the aforementioned patient-reported outcomes of pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction 1 year after THA, adjusted for all included factors.

RESULTS

Five percent (156 of 3411) of the study population lacked improvement in pain, 11% (385 of 3411) reported no improvement in HRQoL, and 10% (339 of 3411) reported they were not satisfied with surgery 1 year after THA. Charnley Class C (multiple-joint OA or another condition that affects the ability to walk) was associated with all outcomes: lack of improvement in pain (OR 1.84 [95% CI 1.24 to 2.71]; p = 0.002), lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR 1.83 [95% CI 1.42 to 2.36]; p < 0.001), and not being satisfied (OR 1.40 [95% CI 1.07 to 1.82]; p = 0.01). Older age was associated with a lack of improvement in pain (OR per year 1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.05]; p = 0.02), lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR per year 1.04 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.06]; p < 0.001), and not being satisfied (OR per year 1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.05]; p < 0.001). Depression was associated with a lack of improvement in pain (OR 1.54 [95% CI 1.00 to 2.35]; p = 0.050) and with not being satisfied (OR 1.50 [95% CI 1.11 to 2.04]; p = 0.01) but not with a lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.76 to 1.43]; p = 0.79). Having four or more comorbidities was associated with a lack of improvement in HRQoL (OR 2.08 [95% CI 1.39 to 3.10]; p < 0.001) but not with a lack of improvement in pain and not being satisfied.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that older age, Charley Class C, and depression in patients with first-line OA interventions were risk factors associated with poorer outcomes regarding pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction after THA. Screening patients with hip OA for depression early in the disease course would provide increased time to optimize treatments and may contribute to better patient-reported pain, HRQoL, and satisfaction after future THA. Further research should focus on identifying the optimal time for surgery in patients with depression, as well as what targeted interventions for depression can improve outcome of surgery in these patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Review of the Most Cited Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) Studies Published in the Neurospine Surgical Literature

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated tools that are widely utilized in research and patient care. Their diversity, quality, and application remain matters of peak research interest. This article is a review of the PROMs that were utilized in high-impact publications in the neurospine surgical literature. The 50 most cited articles on the subject were selected and analysed. Most (42 articles) were published in spine journals and, in particular, in the journal Spine (Phila Pa 1976) (28 articles). A total of 34 PROMs were utilized, of which 24 were used only once in single studies. The four most common PROMs were Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) (15 articles), Short Form-12 and Short Form-36 (SF-12 and SF-36) (11 articles), Ronald-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) (nine articles), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (five articles). Nineteen articles focused on validating translated versions of 11 PROMs to other languages. The languages that had the maximal number of tools translated to amongst the highly cited articles were Italian (six tools), Portuguese (four tools), German (three tools), and Japanese (three tools). The most common diagnoses and the PROMs used for them were back pain and cervical spine disorder (SF-12 and SF-36 (nine articles), RMDQ (eight articles), and ODI (five articles)), and idiopathic scoliosis (SRS-22) (14 articles)). The median (range) article citation number was 137 (78-675). The four most cited PROMs were SRS-22 (2,869), SF-12 and SF-36 (2,558), RMDQ (1,456), and ODI (852). Citation numbers were positively impacted by article age and participant number but not by tool type or clinical diagnosis. In conclusion, a wide range of PROMs was utilized in the 50 most cited publications in the neurospine surgical literature. The majority were disease-specific rather than generic and targeted particular spine pathology. Neurosurgical PROMs were under-represented amongst the most cited articles. Awareness of the PROMs used in high-impact studies may be helpful in tool selection in future research. PROMs are valuable in standardizing subjective outcomes. Their use in research and clinical settings in any validated language is highly encouraged.

Item response theory assumptions were adequately met by the Oxford hip and knee scores

OBJECTIVES

To develop item response theory (IRT) models for the Oxford hip and knee scores which convert patient responses into continuous scores with quantifiable precision and provide these as web applications for efficient score conversion.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Data from the National Health Service patient-reported outcome measures program were used to test the assumptions of IRT (unidimensionality, monotonicity, local independence, and measurement invariance) before fitting models to preoperative response patterns obtained from patients undergoing primary elective hip or knee arthroplasty. The hip and knee datasets contained 321,147 and 355,249 patients, respectively.

RESULTS

Scree plots, Kaiser criterion analyses, and confirmatory factor analyses confirmed unidimensionality and Mokken analysis confirmed monotonicity of both scales. In each scale, all item pairs shared a residual correlation of ≤ 0.20. At the test level, both scales showed measurement invariance by age and gender. Both scales provide precise measurement in preoperative settings but demonstrate poorer precision and ceiling effects in postoperative settings.

CONCLUSION

We provide IRT parameters and web applications that can convert Oxford Hip Score or Oxford Knee Score response sets into continuous measurements and quantify individual measurement error. These can be used in sensitivity analyses or to administer truncated and individualized computerized adaptive tests.

Do we still need to screen our patients?-Orthopaedic scoring based on motion tracking

PURPOSE

Orthopaedic scores are essential for the clinical assessment of movement disorders but require an experienced clinician for the manual scoring. Wearable systems are taking root in the medical field and offer a possibility for the convenient collection of motion tracking data. The purpose of this work is to demonstrate the feasibility of automated orthopaedic scorings based on motion tracking data using the Harris Hip Score and the Knee Society Score as examples.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients received a clinical examination and an instrumental gait analysis after hip or knee arthroplasty. Seven hundred forty-four gait features were extracted from each patient's representative gait cycle. For each score, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted with a subsequent tenfold cross-validation. A data split of 70%/30% was applied for training/testing.

RESULTS

Both scores can be reproduced with excellent coefficients of determination R2 for training, testing and cross-validation by applying regression models based on four to six features from instrumental gait analysis as well as the patient-reported parameter 'pain' as an offset factor.

CONCLUSION

Computing established orthopaedic scores based on motion tracking data yields an automated evaluation of a joint function at the hip and knee which is suitable for direct clinical interpretation. In combination with novel technologies for wearable data collection, these computations can support healthcare staff with objective and telemedical applicable scorings for a large number of patients without the need for trained clinicians.

Quality of total hip arthroplasty health care based on four years of patient-reported outcomes in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Joint arthroplasty registries have incorporated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to evaluate outcomes from a patients' perspective to improve total hip arthroplasty (THA). To draw valid conclusions on PROs, a minimum response rate (RR) of 60% is advised. This study investigated (1) if the quality of THA health care based on PROs improved over the years in the Netherlands, (2) if RRs improved over the years, and (3) difference in PROs over the years in hospitals with RR ≥ 60% compared to RR < 60%.

METHODS

Longitudinal study with publicly available datasets from 2016 to 2019. Primary outcome was increase/decrease in PRO change scores including 95%CI ranges over the years between preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively (pre-3 m), and 12 months postoperatively (pre-12 m). Improved quality of health care was arbitrary defined as when ≥ 3 of 4 included scores or ranges were statistically significant improved. Secondary outcome was increase/decrease in RRs over the years. Subgroups RR ≥ 60% and RR < 60% were compared.

RESULTS

Hospitals (%) collecting THA PROs increased from 78 to 92%. EQ VAS change score increased over the years, and 95%CI ranges of EQ VAS, EQ-5D descriptive system and NRS pain during activity decreased over the years at pre-3 m (p < 0.05). All THA pre-12 m PRO change scores and 95%CI ranges remained equal (p > 0.05). Pre-3 m RR remained equal (around 43%, p = 0.107) and pre-12 m RR decreased 9% (49% to 40%, p = 0.008). Pre-3 m subgroup RR ≥ 60% was too small to analyse (5%). No difference was found between pre-12 m subgroups (RR ≥ 60% = 16%), p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Quality of THA health care based on PROs seems equal in the Netherlands between 2016 and 2019. Although more hospitals participated in PRO collection, low RRs with large IQRs are observed and only 16% of the hospitals achieved the advised RR ≥ 60%. Multiple recommendations are provided to improve PRO collection and use.

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

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Factors associated with persistent postsurgical pain after total knee or hip joint replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Studies have identified demographic, clinical, psychosocial, and perioperative variables associated with persistent pain after a variety of surgeries. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with persistent pain after total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) surgeries. To meet the inclusion criteria, studies were required to assess variables before or at the time of surgery, include a persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) outcome measure at least 2 months after a TKR or THR surgery, and include a statistical analysis of the effect of the risk factor(s) on the outcome measure. Outcomes from studies implementing univariate and multivariable statistical models were analyzed separately. Where possible, data from univariate analyses on the same factors were combined in a meta-analysis. Eighty-one studies involving 171,354 patients were included in the review. Because of the heterogeneity of assessment methods, only 44% of the studies allowed meaningful meta-analysis. In meta-analyses, state anxiety (but not trait anxiety) scores and higher depression scores on the Beck Depression Inventory were associated with an increased risk of PPSP after TKR. In the qualitative summary of multivariable analyses, higher preoperative pain scores were associated with PPSP after TKR or THR. This review systematically assessed factors associated with an increased risk of PPSP after TKR and THR and highlights current knowledge gaps that can be addressed by future research.

International Registries: U.K. National Joint Registry, Nordic Registries, and Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR)

National-level joint arthroplasty registries were among the first large orthopaedic surgery databases and represent some of the longest-running and most influential big databases in our profession. Nordic registries were among the first registries and were followed by excellent registries in the United Kingdom and Australia. In this article, we describe each of these registries and highlight the data elements collected, the data points that can be obtained by linking the national arthroplasty registries to other national registries or databases, the completeness of data, and the strengths and weaknesses of each database. Each of these registries publishes an annual report that is available online, and each also can do more detailed analysis of certain aspects of its data for special studies.When evaluating and interpreting data from national joint registries, the user should be aware that, despite the power of huge numbers, there remain numerous limitations to the observational data. Strong selection biases exist with regard to which patients are chosen for which procedure. Surgeons of different skill levels may use one technique or implant differentially compared with another. The end points that registries collect differ widely: for example, some report only hip dislocations leading to revision rather than all dislocations. Registries in countries in which there are long wait times for revision surgery may report artificially low revision rates compared with countries in which revision surgery is more easily accessible. Despite these limitations, registries have the merit of reporting the actual results of huge numbers of surgical procedures performed across the spectrum of hospitals, surgeons, and patients, making the data extremely powerful for identifying trends, identifying early signs of problems related to certain implants or implant classes, and identifying associations between variables that can be further studied to determine if the effect is causal.

Poor Knee-specific and Generic Patient-reported Outcome Measure Scores at 6 Months Are Associated With Early Revision Knee Arthroplasty: A Study From the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

BACKGROUND

The ability to identify which patients are at a greater risk of early revision knee arthroplasty has important practical and resource implications. Many international arthroplasty registries administer patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to provide a holistic assessment of pain, function, and quality of life. However, few PROM scores have been evaluated as potential indicators of early revision knee arthroplasty, and earlier studies have largely focused on knee-specific measures.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

This national registry-based study asked: (1) Which 6-month postoperative knee-specific and generic PROM scores are associated with early revision knee arthroplasty (defined as revision surgery performed 6 to 24 months after the primary procedure)? (2) Is a clinically important improvement in PROM scores (based on thresholds for the minimal important change) after primary knee arthroplasty associated with a lower risk of early revision?

METHODS

Preoperative and 6-month postoperative PROM scores for patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty were sourced from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) and Arthroplasty Clinical Outcomes Registry National. Between January 2013 and December 2020, PROM data were available for 19,402 primary total knee arthroplasties; these data were linked to AOANJRR data on revision knee arthroplasty. Of these, 3448 procedures were excluded because they did not have 6-month PROM data, they had not reached the 6-month postoperative point, they had died before 24 months, or they had received revision knee arthroplasty before the 6-month PROMs assessment. After these exclusions, data were analyzed for 15,954 primary knee arthroplasties. Associations between knee-specific (knee pain, Oxford Knee Score, and 12-item Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS-12]) or generic PROM scores (5-level EuroQol quality of life instrument [EQ-5D], EQ VAS, perceived change, and satisfaction) and revision surgery were explored using t-tests, chi-square tests, and regression models. Ninety-four revision procedures were performed at 6 to 24 months, most commonly for infection (39% [37 procedures]). The early revision group was younger than the unrevised group (mean age 64 years versus 68 years) and a between-group difference in American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade was noted. Apart from a small difference in preoperative low back pain for the early revision group (mean low back pain VAS 4.2 points for the early revision group versus 3.3 points for the unrevised group), there were no between-group differences in preoperative knee-specific or generic PROM scores on univariate analysis. As the inclusion of ASA grade or low back pain score did not alter the model results, the final multivariable model included only the most clinically plausible confounders (age and gender) as covariates. Multivariable models (adjusting for age and gender) were also used to examine the association between a clinically important improvement in PROM scores (based on published thresholds for minimal important change) and the likelihood of early revision.

RESULTS

After adjusting for age and gender, poor postoperative knee pain, Oxford, KOOS-12, EQ-5D, and EQ VAS scores were all associated with early revision. A one-unit increase (worsening) in knee pain at 6 months was associated with a 31% increase in the likelihood of revision (RR 1.31 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.43]; p < 0.001). Reflecting the reversed scoring direction, a one-unit increase (improvement) in Oxford or KOOS-12 score was associated with a 9% and 5% reduction in revision risk, respectively (RR for Oxford: 0.91 [95% CI 0.90 to 0.93]; p < 0.001; RR for KOOS-12 summary: 0.95 [95% CI 0.94 to 0.97]; p < 0.001). Patient dissatisfaction (RR 6.8 [95% CI 3.7 to 12.3]) and patient-perceived worsening (RR 11.7 [95% CI 7.4 to 18.5]) at 6 months were also associated with an increased likelihood of early revision. After adjusting for age and gender, patients who did not achieve a clinically important improvement in PROM scores had a higher risk of early revision (RR 2.9 for the knee pain VAS, RR 4.2 for the Oxford Knee Score, RR 6.3 to 8.6 for KOOS-12, and RR 2.3 for EQ-5D) compared with those who did (reference group).

CONCLUSION

Knee-specific and generic PROM scores offer an efficient approach to identifying patients at greater risk of early revision surgery, using either the 6-month score or the magnitude of improvement. These data indicate that surgeons can use single- and multi-item measures to detect a patient-perceived unsuccessful surgical outcome at 6 months after primary knee arthroplasty. Surgeons should be alert to poor PROM scores at 6 months or small improvements in scores (for example, less than 2 points for knee pain VAS or less than 10.5 points for Oxford Knee Score), which signal a need for direct patient follow-up or expedited clinical review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

How do Patient-reported Outcome Scores in International Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Registries Compare?

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the only systematic approach through which the patient's perspective can be considered by surgeons (in determining a procedure's efficacy or appropriateness) or healthcare systems (in the context of value-based healthcare). PROMs in registries enable international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after total joint arthroplasty, but the extent to which those scores may vary between different registry populations has not been clearly defined.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) To what degree do mean change in general and joint-specific PROM scores vary across arthroplasty registries, and to what degree is the proportion of missing PROM scores in an individual registry associated with differences in the mean reported change scores? (2) Do PROM scores vary with patient BMI across registries? (3) Are comorbidity levels comparable across registries, and are they associated with differences in PROM scores?

METHODS

Thirteen national, regional, or institutional registries from nine countries reported aggregate PROM scores for patients who had completed PROMs preoperatively and 6 and/or 12 months postoperatively. The requested aggregate PROM scores were the EuroQol-5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D) index values, on which score 1 reflects "full health" and 0 reflects "as bad as death." Joint-specific PROMs were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), with total scores ranging from 0 to 48 (worst-best), and the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (KOOS-PS) values, scored 0 to 100 (worst-best). Eligible patients underwent primary unilateral THA or TKA for osteoarthritis between 2016 and 2019. Registries were asked to exclude patients with subsequent revisions within their PROM collection period. Raw aggregated PROM scores and scores adjusted for age, gender, and baseline values were inspected descriptively. Across all registries and PROMs, the reported percentage of missing PROM data varied from 9% (119 of 1354) to 97% (5305 of 5445). We therefore graphically explored whether PROM scores were associated with the level of data completeness. For each PROM cohort, chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (men versus women; age 20 to 64 years, 65 to 74 years, and older than 75 years; and high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were evaluated descriptively by comparing proportions with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification of 3 or higher across registries for each PROM cohort.

RESULTS

The mean improvement in EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.16 to 0.33 for hip registries and 0.12 to 0.25 for knee registries. The mean improvement in the OHS (seven registries) ranged from 18 to 24, and for the HOOS-PS (three registries) it ranged from 29 to 35. The mean improvement in the OKS (six registries) ranged from 15 to 20, and for the KOOS-PS (four registries) it ranged from 19 to 23. For all PROMs, variation was smaller when adjusting the scores for differences in age, gender, and baseline values. After we compared the registries, there did not seem to be any association between the level of missing PROM data and the mean change in PROM scores. The proportions of patients with BMI 30 kg/m 2 or higher ranged from 16% to 43% (11 hip registries) and from 35% to 62% (10 knee registries). Distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed across hip and knee registries. Further, for all PROMs, distributions also differed across 12 predefined PROM strata. For the EQ-5D, patients in the younger age groups (20 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years) had higher proportions of BMI measurements greater than 30 kg/m 2 than older patients, and patients with the lowest baseline scores had higher proportions of BMI measurements more than 30 kg/m 2 compared with patients with higher baseline scores. These associations were similar for the OHS and OKS cohorts. The proportions of patients with ASA Class at least 3 ranged across registries from 6% to 35% (eight hip registries) and from 9% to 42% (nine knee registries).

CONCLUSION

Improvements in PROM scores varied among international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, gender, and preoperative scores. Higher BMI tended to be associated with lower preoperative PROM scores across registries. Large variation in BMI and comorbidity distributions across registries suggest that future international studies should consider the effect of adjusting for these factors. Although we were not able to evaluate its effect specifically, missing PROM data is a recurring challenge for registries. Demonstrating generalizability of results and evaluating the degree of response bias is crucial in using registry-based PROMs data to evaluate differences in outcome. Comparability between registries in terms of specific PROMs collection, postoperative timepoints, and demographic factors to enable confounder adjustment is necessary to use comparison between registries to inform and improve arthroplasty care internationally.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Patients' perspectives on the benefits of feedback on patient-reported outcome measures in a web-based personalized decision report for hip and knee osteoarthritis

Background

Applications of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for individual patient management are expanding with the support of digital tools. Providing PROM-based information to patients can potentially improve care experiences and outcomes through informing and activating patients. This study explored patients’ perspectives on the benefits of receiving feedback on PROMs in the context of a web-based personalized decision report to guide care for their hip or knee osteoarthritis.

Methods

This qualitative descriptive interview study was nested in a pragmatic clinical trial of a personalized report, which includes descriptive PROM scores and predicted postoperative PROM scores. Patients completed a semi-structured interview within 6 weeks of an office visit with an orthopaedic surgeon. Only patients who reported receiving the report and reviewing it with the surgeon and/or a health educator were included. Data were iteratively analyzed using a combination of deductive and inductive coding strategies.

Results

Twenty-five patients aged 49–82 years (60% female, 72% surgical treatment decision) participated and described three primary benefits of the PROM feedback within the report: 1. Gaining Information About My Health Status, including data teaching new information, confirming what was known, or providing a frame of reference; 2. Fostering Communication Between Patient and Surgeon, encompassing use of the data to set expectations, ask and answer questions, and facilitate shared understanding; and 3. Increasing My Confidence and Trust, relating to the treatment outcomes, treatment decision, and surgeon.

Conclusions

Patients identified actual and hypothetical benefits of receiving feedback on PROM scores in the context of a web-based decision report, including advantages for those who had already made a treatment decision before seeing the surgeon. Findings provide insight into patients’ perspectives on how digital PROM data can promote patient-centered care. Results should be considered in the context of the homogeneous sample and complex trial. While participants perceived value in this personalized report, questions remain regarding best practices in patient-facing data presentation and engagement.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03102580. Registered on 5 April 2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05764-1.

Ask Patients What They Expect! A Survey Among Patients Awaiting Total Hip Arthroplasty in Germany

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an elective surgery. Therefore, patient satisfaction with the results of surgery is paramount. The association between fulfillment of patients' expectations and satisfaction is well known. The aim of this study was to identify key expectations of patients with hip osteoarthritis awaiting THA.

METHODS

A mixed-methods approach was used, consisting of two sequential parts. The questionnaire was developed based on literature review and focus group interviews. A nationwide survey was conducted in 21 orthopedic departments within Germany.

RESULTS

Out of 691 obtained questionnaires, 636 were analyzed (mean age = 65.7 years (±11.3), 56.1% female). A majority of patients (≥75%) reported more than 20 complaints as 'present' due to hip osteoarthritis. A total of 9 key expectations were identified, which were reported by more than 75% of the patients as 'mandatory' for a successful THA. The identified key expectations were related to pain, range of motion, walking abilities, gait pattern, transitions, leisure and sports activities, awareness of the affected hip, satisfaction with health or life, and compensatory posture. A consistently high correlation was found between the complaints and the corresponding expectations.

CONCLUSION

The expectations of patients have greatly expanded. In this study, a set of mandatory key expectations shared by the majority of patients was identified. The likelihood of fulfillment of key expectations should be assessed for weighing benefits and harms of available treatment options during the indication process. In addition, the results of this study might be used as a resource for shared decision-making.

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

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

Early patient-reported outcomes from primary hip and knee arthroplasty have improved over the past seven years : an analysis of the NHS PROMs dataset

AIMS

Routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been useful to quantify and quality-assess provision of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the UK for the past decade. This study aimed to explore whether the outcome following primary THA and TKA had improved over the past seven years.

METHODS

Secondary data analysis of 277,430 primary THAs and 308,007 primary TKAs from the NHS PROMs programme was undertaken. Outcome measures were: postoperative Oxford Hip/Knee Score (OHS/OKS); proportion of patients achieving a clinically important improvement in joint function (responders); quality of life; patient satisfaction; perceived success; and complication rates. Outcome measures were compared based on year of surgery using multiple linear and logistic regression models.

RESULTS

For primary THA, multiple linear regression modelling found that more recent year of surgery was associated with higher postoperative OHS (unstandardized coefficient (B) 0.15 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.17); p < 0.001) and higher EuroQol five-dimension index (EQ-5D) utility (B 0.002 (95% CI 0.001 to 0.002); p < 0.001). The odds of being a responder (odds ratio (OR) 1.02 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.03); p < 0.001) and patient satisfaction (OR 1.02 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.03); p < 0.001) increased with year of surgery, while the odds of any complication reduced (OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.97 to 0.98); p < 0.001). No trend was found for perceived success (p = 0.555). For primary TKA, multiple linear regression modelling found that more recent year of surgery was associated with higher postoperative OKS (B 0.21 points (95% CI 0.19 to 0.22); p < 0.001) and higher EQ-5D utility (B 0.002 (95% CI 0.002 to 0.003); p < 0.001). The odds of being a responder (OR 1.04 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.04); p < 0.001), perceived success (OR 1.02 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.02); p < 0.001), and patient satisfaction (OR 1.02 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.02); p < 0.001) all increased with year of surgery, while the odds of any complication reduced (OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.97 to 0.97); p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Nearly all patient-reported outcomes following primary THA/TKA improved by a small amount over the past seven years. Due to the high proportion of patients achieving good outcomes, PROMs following THA and TKA may need to focus on better discrimination of patients achieving high scores to be able to continue to measure improvement in outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):687-695.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

Background

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Association between patient factors and hospital completeness of a patient-reported outcome measures program in joint arthroplasty, a cohort study

Background

The collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following arthroplasty is common. PROMs data collection programs seek to maximise completeness in order to minimise selection bias and optimise representativeness of the sample attained. We aimed to determine if patient factors influence variation in PROMs program completeness between-hospitals.

Methods

Using data from a national arthroplasty registry PROMs program, we tested for associations between patient characteristics (age, sex, body mass index [BMI] and American Society of Anaesthesiologists [ASA] class) and both potential completeness (registration completeness: the proportion of arthroplasty patients that were registered in the PROMs electronic system) and actual completeness (response completeness: the proportion of arthroplasty patients who provided PROMs data) using linear regression.

Results

When using all elective primary total hip, knee or shoulder arthroplasty procedures (N = 31,801) from 43 hospitals as the denominator, overall registration completeness was 52%, varying from 5 to 87% between hospitals. Overall pre-operative response completeness was 46%, varying from 5 to 82% between hospitals. There were no significant associations between hospital-level registration completeness or response completeness and age, sex, BMI or ASA score.

Conclusion

Completeness rates of a PROMs program in arthroplasty varied widely between hospitals but in the absence of a relationship between measured patient factors and completeness rates, the observed variation likely relates to local site factors such as access to patients, local resources and clinician engagement with the program. Efforts to improve the rates of completeness of arthroplasty PROMs programs at individual hospitals may not improve the representativeness of the sample.

Hospitals vary in how completely they include and follow up patients when measuring patient-reported health. It is important to know if the completeness of inclusion and follow up by hospitals is affected by patient characteristics. This study addresses that problem by using data from a national patient outcome survey involving over 30,000 patients from 43 hospitals to look at the correlation between certain patient characteristics (like age, sex, obesity and general health) and the rates of inclusion and follow up for each hospital.

Rates of inclusion (registering patients in the program) and follow up rates varied widely between hospitals (from 5 to 87%). The rates of inclusion and follow up were not correlated with patient age, sex, body mass index or their general health. These findings suggest that the variation between hospitals in the rates of inclusion of joint replacement patients in health surveys are not due to differences in patient characteristics. The differences may be due to local hospital factors, such as resources and clinician engagement.

Loss to patient-reported outcome measure follow-up after hip arthroplasty and knee arthroplasty

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine satisfaction rates after hip and knee arthroplasty in patients who did not respond to postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), characteristics of non-responders, and contact preferences to maximize response rates.

Methods

A prospective cohort study of patients planned to undergo hip arthroplasty (n = 713) and knee arthroplasty (n = 737) at a UK university teaching hospital who had completed preoperative PROMs questionnaires, including the EuroQol five-dimension health-related quality of life score, and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Follow-up questionnaires were sent by post at one year, including satisfaction scoring. Attempts were made to contact patients who did not initially respond. Univariate, logistic regression, and receiver operator curve analysis was performed.

Results

At one year, 667 hip patients (93.5%) and 685 knee patients (92.9%) had undergone surgery and were alive. No response was received from 151/667 hip patients (22.6%), 83 (55.0%) of whom were ultimately contacted); or from 108/685 knee patients (15.8%), 91 (84.3%) of whom were ultimately contacted. There was no difference in satisfaction after arthroplasty between initial non-responders and responders for hips (74/81 satisfied vs 476/516 satisfied; p = 0.847) or knees (81/93 satisfied vs 470/561 satisfied; p = 0.480). Initial non-response and persistent non-response was associated with younger age, higher BMIs, and worse preoperative PROMs for both hip and knee patients (p < 0.050). Being in employment was associated with persistent non-response for hip patients (p = 0.047). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that younger age (p < 0.038), higher BMI (p = 0.018), and poorer preoperative OHS (p = 0.031) were independently associated with persistent non-response to hip PROMs. No independent associations were identified for knees. Using a threshold of > 66.4 years predicted a preference for contact by post (area under the curve 0.723 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.647 to 0.799; p < 0.001, though this CI crosses the 0.7 limit considered reliable).

Conclusion

The majority of initial non-responders were ultimately contactable with effort. Satisfaction rates were not inferior in patients who did not initially respond to PROMs.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(4):275–283.

Measurement properties of New Mobility Score to evaluate functional recovery in the elderly following total hip arthroplasty

Introduction/Objective. The aim of this study is to identify and evaluate the use of New Mobility Score in estimating functional recovery 3 months after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. Seventy patients, aged > 60, who underwent THA. Treatment group was subjected to the comprehensive rehabilitation program and control group to the standard one. Primary outcome was assessed with Harris Hip Score (HHS) and New Mobility Score (NMS), and secondary one by Medical Outcomes Health Survey (Short Form Health Survey - SF-36). Questionnaires were collected before and three months after hip surgery. Results. Treatment group showed significant improvement 3 months postoperatively. The correlation in both groups between HHS and NMS was very strong (r > 0.700). Treatment group following surgery showed strong correlation between Recovery through Personal Care Services (PCS) and HHS and NMS (r > 0.700), moderate to strong between pain categories and HHS (r = 0.380; r = 0.583) and NMS (r = 0.424). Control group showed strong correlation between PCS and HHS (r = 0.704), and NMS (r = 0.568) and moderate to pain categories and HHS (r = 0.546; r = 0.466). The area under the curve (AUC) described the inherent validity of all measurement used AUCNMS = 0.724, p = 0.001, AUCHHS = 0.788, p = 0.000 and AUCPCS = 0.747, p = 0.001. Conclusion. The NMS could be successfully used in routine clinical assessment of elderly patients following THA. The trial is registered in ISRCTN Register with https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN73197506