Examination of exclusion criteria in total knee arthroplasty rehabilitation trials: influence on the application of evidence in day-to-day practice

Strategies to Manage Poorer Outcomes After Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review of Current Understanding, Unanswered Questions, and Future Directions

PURPOSE

Although hip or knee arthroplasty is generally a successful intervention, it is documented that 15%-30% of patients undergoing arthroplasty report suboptimal outcomes. This narrative review aims to provide an overview of the key findings concerning the management of poorer outcomes after hip or knee arthroplasty.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of articles was conducted up to November 2023 across three electronic databases. Only studies written in English were included, with no limitations applied regarding study design and time.

RESULT

Efficiently addressing poorer outcomes after arthroplasty necessitates a thorough exploration of appropriate methods for assessing recovery following hip or knee arthroplasty, ensuring accurate identification of patients at risk or experiencing poorer recovery. When selecting appropriate outcome measure tools, various factors should be taken into consideration, including understanding patients' priorities throughout the recovery process, assessing psychometric properties of outcome measure tools at different time points after arthroplasty, understanding how to combine/reconcile provider-assessed and patient-reported outcome measures, and determining the appropriate methods to interpret outcome measure scores. However, further research in these areas is warranted. In addition, the identification of key modifiable factors affecting outcomes and the development of interventions to manage these factors are needed.

CONCLUSION

There is growing attention paid to delivering interventions for patients at risk or not optimally recovering following hip or knee arthroplasty. To achieve this, it is essential to identify the most appropriate outcome measure tools, factors associated with poorer recovery and management of these factors.

Pre- and Post-Operative Rehabilitation Interventions in Patients at Risk of Poor Outcomes Following Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: Protocol for Two Systematic Reviews

Objective

Total knee (TKA) and hip arthroplasty (THA) are successful procedures in treating end-stage osteoarthritis when nonoperative treatments fail. However, a growing body of literature has been reporting suboptimal outcomes following TKA and THA. While pre- and post-operative rehabilitation is imperative to recovery, little is known about their effectiveness for patients at risk of poor outcomes. In the 2 systematic reviews with identical methodology, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of (a) pre-operative and (b) post-operative rehabilitation interventions for patients at risk of poor outcomes following TKA and THA.

Methods

The 2 systematic reviews will follow the principles and recommendations outlined in the Cochrane Handbook. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pilot RCTs will be searched in 6 databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Pedro, and OTseeker. Eligible studies including patients at risk of poor outcomes and evaluating rehabilitation interventions following and preceding arthroplasty will be considered for inclusion. Primary outcomes will include performance-based tests and functional patient-reported outcome measures, and secondary outcomes will include health-related quality of life and pain. The quality of eligible RCTs will be evaluated using the Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and the strength of evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).

Discussion

These reviews will synthesize the evidence regarding the effectiveness of pre-and post-operative rehabilitation interventions for patients at risk of poor outcomes, which in turn may inform practitioners and patients in planning and implementing the most optimal rehabilitation programs to achieve the best outcomes after arthroplasty.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO CRD42022355574.

Comparing "people-like-me" and linear mixed model predictions of functional recovery following knee arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

Prediction models can be useful tools for monitoring patient status and personalizing treatment in health care. The goal of this study was to compare the relative strengths and weaknesses of 2 different approaches for predicting functional recovery after knee arthroplasty: a neighbors-based "people-like-me" (PLM) approach and a linear mixed model (LMM) approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used 2 distinct datasets to train and then test PLM and LMM prediction approaches for functional recovery following knee arthroplasty. We used the Timed Up and Go (TUG)-a common test of mobility-to operationalize physical function. Both approaches used patient characteristics and baseline postoperative TUG values to predict TUG recovery from days 1-425 following surgery. We then compared the accuracy and precision of PLM and LMM predictions.

RESULTS

A total of 317 patient records with 1379 TUG observations were used to train PLM and LMM approaches, and 456 patient records with 1244 TUG observations were used to test the predictions. The approaches performed similarly in terms of mean squared error and bias, but the PLM approach provided more accurate and precise estimates of prediction uncertainty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Overall, the PLM approach more accurately and precisely predicted TUG recovery following knee arthroplasty. These results suggest PLM predictions may be more clinically useful for monitoring recovery and personalizing care following knee arthroplasty. However, clinicians and organizations seeking to use predictions in practice should consider additional factors (eg, resource requirements) when selecting a prediction approach.