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

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.

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.

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.