High Degree of Variability in Reporting of Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy

Predicting Outcomes in Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) continues to rise in incidence, and thus there is an increased focus on factors that predict patient outcomes. The factors that impact the outcomes of arthroscopic FAIS treatment are complex. The purpose of this review is to outline the current literature concerning predictors of patient outcomes for arthroscopic treatment of FAIS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple studies have shown that various patient demographics, joint parameters, and surgical techniques are all correlated with postoperative outcomes after arthroscopic FAIS surgery, as measured by both validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores and rates of revision surgery including hip arthroplasty. To accurately predict patient outcomes for arthroscopic FAIS surgery, consideration should be directed toward preoperative patient-specific factors and intraoperative technical factors. The future of accurately selecting patient predictors for outcomes will only improve with increased data, improved techniques, and technological advancement.

Responsiveness of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Large Knee Articular Cartilage Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cartilage transplantation is commonly used to treat large (>4 cm2) articular cartilage defects of the knee. The 2 most common transplants are osteochondral allograft transplantation and autologous chondrocyte implantation. Several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to determine the efficacy of treatment, but it is unknown which measures are the most effective.

PURPOSE

To report the multiple PROMs used after large knee articular cartilage transplantation surgery and to compare the responsiveness between them.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science databases was performed. A total of 181 articles met inclusion criteria. Patient and study characteristics were extracted, including pre- and postoperative means for PROMs. From the articles that met inclusion criteria for responsiveness analysis (2+ PROMs reported, 1-year minimum follow-up, reported pre- and postoperative means and standard deviations; n = 131), the authors compared the responsiveness between PROM instruments using effect size and relative efficiency (RE) if a PROM could be compared with another in ≥10 articles.

RESULTS

A total of 10,015 patients (10,093 knees; mean age, 34.8 years; mean body mass index, 26.1) were included in this study. The mean follow-up time was 58.3 months (range, 1.5-247.2 months), imaging findings were reported in 80 articles (44.2%), patient satisfaction was reported in 39 articles (21.5%), and range of motion was reported in 10 articles (5.5%). There were 58 unique PROM instruments identified, with the most used being the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score (n = 118; 65.2%), followed by Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain (n = 58; 32.0%), KOOS Sport and Recreation (n = 58; 32.0%), KOOS Quality of Life (n = 57; 31.5%), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (n = 57; 31.5%), and KOOS Symptoms (n = 57; 31.5%). Overall, IKDC was found to have the greatest effect size (1.68) and the best responsiveness of the other PROMs, which include KOOS Pain (RE, 1.38), KOOS Symptoms (RE, 3.06), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (RE, 1.65), KOOS Sport and Recreation (RE, 1.44), Lysholm (RE, 1.76), and Tegner (RE, 1.56).

CONCLUSION

The IKDC is the most responsive PROM after large knee articular cartilage transplantation surgery. The IKDC score is recommended for assessing outcomes after cartilage transplantation surgery.

ASES and UCLA Are Responsive Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to assess shoulder function, but it is unknown which are the most effective.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to report the multiple PROMs used after rotator cuff repair (RCR) and to compare the responsiveness between them. It was hypothesized that the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff PROM would be the most responsive and commonly used in patients undergoing RCR.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and PRISMA-Searching extension guidelines via PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase (Elsevier), and Web of Science (Clarivate). Patient and study characteristics were extracted. From the studies that met inclusion criteria for responsiveness analysis (≥2 PROMs reported, 1-year minimum follow-up, and pre- and postoperative PROM means and standard deviations reported), the authors compared the responsiveness between PROM instruments using effect size and relative efficiency (RE) if a PROM could be compared with another in ≥10 articles.

RESULTS

A total of 252 studies met inclusion criteria (32,072 patients; mean age, 59.6 years; mean body mass index, 28.7; mean follow-up time, 27.8 months). Range of motion was reported in 131 (52%) studies and imaging findings were reported in 123 (49%) studies. There were 67 PROM instruments identified; the most commonly used were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) (n = 183; 73%), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (n = 163; 65%), and Constant (n = 118; 47%) scores. The 3 PROMs with the highest effect sizes were the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (2.51), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (2.42), and ASES (2.00) scores. Overall, UCLA and ASES scores were the most responsive PROMs. The ASES PROM was more responsive than the VAS (RE, 1.70), Constant (RE, 2.76), Simple Shoulder Test (RE, 1.67), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (RE, 2.14) scores. The UCLA PROM was more responsive than the ASES (RE, 1.03), VAS (RE, 3.66), Constant (RE, 1.72), and Simple Shoulder Test (RE, 1.66) scores.

CONCLUSION

ASES and UCLA scores were the most responsive PROMs after RCR. The authors recommend widespread adoption of ASES and UCLA scores for clinical and research standardization; however, the UCLA PROM requires in-person range of motion and strength testing, which is a practical limitation and barrier to long-term follow-up.

Cross-cultural adaptation, validation and psychometric evaluation of the International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT12) to Hebrew

BACKGROUND

The "International Hip Outcome Tool 12" (iHOT12) is a self-administered patient-reported outcome tool for measuring health-related quality of life and physical functioning in young and active patients with hip pathology. Since the iHOT12 has become widely used, we sought to translate and validate it for Hebrew-speaking populations. The aims of this study were: (1) To translate and culturally adapt the iHOT12 into Hebrew using established guidelines. (2) To test the new Hebrew version for validity, and (3) reliability.

METHODS

The iHOT12 was translated and culturally adapted from English to Hebrew (iHOT12-H) according to the COSAMIN guidelines. For validity, the iHOT12-H and Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) were completed by 200 patients with hip pathology. Exploratory factor analysis was used to assess structural validity. Subsequently, 51 patients repeated the iHOT12-H within a 2-week interval. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC), Cronbach alpha, and Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) were calculated to assess reliability.

RESULTS

Construct validity: iHOT12-H correlated strongly to the WOMAC scores (r = -0.82, P < 0.001, Spearman). Factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure. Cronbach's alpha was 0.953 confirming internal consistency to be highly satisfactory. Test-retest correlation of the iHOT12-H was excellent with an ICC = 0.956 (95% CI 0.924-0.974). There was no floor or ceiling effect.

CONCLUSION

The iHOT12 Hebrew version has excellent reliability, good construct validity and can be used as a measurement tool for physical functioning and quality of life in young, physically active patients with hip pathology. This study will serve Israeli researchers in evaluating treatment effectiveness for these patients. Moreover, it will also enable multinational cooperation in the study of hip pathology.

Development and Validation of a Short-Form Version of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Scale (Short-WOSI)

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have transitioned from primarily being used as research instruments to becoming increasingly used in the clinical setting to assess recovery and inform shared decision-making. However, there is a need to develop validated short-form PROM instruments to decrease patient burden and ease incorporation into clinical practice.

PURPOSE

To assess the validity and responsiveness of a shortened version of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (Short-WOSI) when compared with the full WOSI and other shoulder-related PROM instruments.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

This study was a secondary analysis of data collected as part of an institutional review board-approved, multicenter cohort of 1160 patients undergoing surgical stabilization for shoulder instability. The following PROMs were captured preoperatively and 2 years after surgery: WOSI, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and 36-Item Health Survey (RAND-36). The cohort was split into 2 data sets: a training set to be used in the development of the Short-WOSI (n = 580) and a test set to be used to assess the validity and responsiveness of the Short-WOSI relative to the full WOSI, ASES, SANE, and RAND-36.

RESULTS

The Short-WOSI demonstrated excellent internal consistency before surgery (Cronbach α = .83) and excellent internal consistency at the 2-year follow-up (Cronbach α = .93). The baseline, 2-year, and pre- to postoperative changes in Short-WOSI and WOSI were closely correlated (r > 0.90), with both demonstrating large effect sizes (Short-WOSI = 1.92, WOSI = 1.81). Neither the Short-WOSI nor the WOSI correlated well with the other PROM instruments before (r = 0.21-0.33) or after (r = 0.25-0.38) surgery. The Short-WOSI, WOSI, and SANE scores were more responsive than ASES and RAND-36 scores.

CONCLUSION

The 7-item Short-WOSI demonstrated excellent internal consistency and a lack of floor or ceiling effects. The Short-WOSI demonstrated excellent cross-sectional and longitudinal construct validity and was similarly responsive over time as the full WOSI. Neither the Short-WOSI nor WOSI correlated with more general shoulder PROMs, underscoring the advantage of using instability-specific instruments for this population.

Staged Bilateral Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: Index Surgery Patient Reported Outcome Measures Predict Contralateral Surgery Results at 2 Years

PURPOSE

To determine whether (1) patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores after index hip arthroscopy correlate with PRO scores for the contralateral hip in patients undergoing staged bilateral hip arthroscopy and (2) patients who achieved minimal clinically important difference (MCID) or patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) for the index hip were more likely to achieve MCID or PASS for the contralateral hip.

METHODS

Patients who underwent staged bilateral hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome were retrospectively reviewed. PRO scores were prospectively collected at preoperative and 1- and 2-year timepoints. Odds ratios for achievement of MCID and PASS for the contralateral hip given achievement for the index hip were calculated. Improvements from before surgery to 2 years after surgery were correlated between both hips.

RESULTS

A total of 143 patients (286 hips) were included in the final analysis. Average time between surgeries was 8.5 months (range, 0.7-57.2). Both hips demonstrated significant improvement (P < .05 for all) in all PROs at 2 years. Achievement of MCID in Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) at the 1-year timepoint for the index hip was predictive of achievement of MCID in HOS-ADL at 2 years for the contralateral hip. Achievement of PASS in all PROs at the 1-year timepoint for the index hip were predictive of achievement of PASS in the equivalent outcome score at the 2-year mark for the contralateral hip. Achievement of MCID or PASS at the 2-year timepoint for the index hip was predictive of achievement of the equivalent outcome at the 2-year timepoint for the contralateral hip. The strongest correlation between improvement in PRO scores for the index and contralateral hips was noted in patients who underwent staged hip arthroscopy within less than 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Patients experience significant clinical benefit in both hips after staged bilateral hip arthroscopy. Results from the initial hip arthroscopy at either 1- or 2-year follow-up can be used to predict outcomes on the contralateral side; however, there is a higher degree of predictive value using 2-year results. Average correlations between 2-year PROs on the index and contralateral hips were moderate to strong, regardless of the time between surgeries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Mobility Computerized Adaptive Testing Maintains High Correlation and Low Test Burden Compared With Legacy Hip-Specific Instruments in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

PURPOSE

To evaluate the reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness of the lower extremity-specific Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Mobility (MO) bank in patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery at a large academic musculoskeletal specialty center between November 2019 and November 2020 completed the following baseline and 6-month measures: PROMIS MO, PROMIS Pain Interference (PI), PROMIS Physical Function (PF), modified Harris Hip Score, International Hip Outcome Tool 33, visual analog scale, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Construct validity was evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficients. The number of questions until completion was recorded as a marker of test burden. The percentage of patients scoring at the extreme high (ceiling) or low (floor) for each measure was recorded to measure inclusivity. Responsiveness was tested by comparing differences between baseline and 6-month measures, controlling for age and sex, using generalized estimating equations. Magnitudes of responsiveness were assessed through the effect size (Cohen d).

RESULTS

In this study, 660 patients (50% female patients) aged 32 ± 14 years were evaluated. PROMIS MO showed a strong correlation with PROMIS PF (r = 0.84, P < .001), the International Hip Outcome Tool 33 (r = 0.73, P < .001), PROMIS PI (r = -0.76, P < .001), and the modified Harris Hip Score (r = 0.73, P < .001). Neither PROMIS MO, PROMIS PI, nor PROMIS PF met the conventional criteria for floor or ceiling effects (≥15%). The mean number of questions answered (± standard deviation) was 4.7 ± 2.1 for PROMIS MO, 4.1 ± 0.6 for PROMIS PI, and 4.1 ± 0.6 for PROMIS PF. From baseline to 6 months, the PROMIS and legacy measures exhibited significant responsiveness (P < .05), with similar effect sizes between the patient-reported outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This longitudinal study reveals that in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, PROMIS MO computerized adaptive testing maintains high correlation with legacy hip-specific instruments, significant responsiveness to change, and low test burden compared with legacy measures, with no ceiling or floor effects at 6-month postoperative follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Patient-Reported Outcome Surveys for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Demonstrate Strong Correlations, High Minimum Clinically Important Difference Agreement and Large Ceiling Effects

PURPOSE

To determine the correlation between different patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements used to assess outcomes after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in a single cohort of patients.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS (without dysplasia, arthritis, or joint hypermobility) were retrospectively analyzed from a prospectively collected cohort. PROs collected before surgery and at 2-year follow-up included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (HOOS) with subscales for symptoms, pain, activities of daily living (ADL), sport, and quality of life (QoL), and the physical and mental components of the Short Form-12 (SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS).

RESULTS

Three hundred patients with 2 years' follow-up (mean age 35.1 ± 11.3, BMI 24.7 ± 3.8, 52.7% female, median Tönnis grade 1) were identified. All patients underwent femoroplasty and labral repair. There was a strong correlation among nearly all the PRO surveys at 2-year follow-up, with the highest correlations identified between mHHS and HOOS-Pain (r = .86, P < .001) and mHHS and HOOS-ADL (r = .85, P < .001). Preoperative scores and the change from preoperative to postoperative scores demonstrated an overall moderate correlation between surveys. There was a consistently weak correlation between the SF-12 MCS and all other PROs. There were strong agreements (67%-77%) in the patients achieving minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for each PRO survey. All surveys except the SF-12 demonstrated a ceiling effect after surgery, with 13% to 43% of patients achieving the maximum score.

CONCLUSIONS

PRO surveys used for FAIS demonstrate strong correlations, especially in the evaluation of patients during the postoperative period. MCID for VAS, mHHS, and HOOS demonstrate strong agreement, whereas large ceiling effects were seen with the mHHS and HOOS. The results support a more efficient use of PRO scores while being able to accurately capture patient outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective case series.

Comparing exercise and patient education with usual care in the treatment of hip dysplasia: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial with 6-month follow-up (MovetheHip trial)

INTRODUCTION

Surgery is not a viable treatment for all patients with hip dysplasia. Currently, usual care for these patients is limited to a consultation on self-management. We have shown that an exercise and patient education intervention is a feasible and acceptable intervention for patients not receiving surgery. Therefore, we aim to investigate whether patients with hip dysplasia randomised to exercise and patient education have a different mean change in self-reported pain compared with those randomised to usual care over 6 months. Furthermore, we aim to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and perform a process evaluation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In a randomised controlled trial, 200 young and middle-aged patients will be randomised to either exercise and patient education or usual care at a 1:1 ratio through permuted block randomisation. The intervention group will receive exercise instruction and patient education over 6 months. The usual care group will receive one consultation on self-management of hip symptoms. The primary outcome is the self-reported mean change in the pain subscale of the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS). Secondary outcomes include mean changes in the other HAGOS subscales, in the Short Version of the International Hip Outcome Tool, in performance, balance and maximal hip muscle strength. Between-group comparison from baseline to 6-month follow-up will be made with intention-to-treat analyses with a mixed-effects model. Cost-effectiveness will be evaluated by relating quality-adjusted life years and differences in HAGOS pain to differences in costs over 12 months. The functioning of the intervention will be evaluated as implementation, mechanisms of change and contextual factors.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol was approved by the Committee on Health Research Ethics in the Central Denmark Region and registered at ClinicalTrials. Positive, negative and inconclusive findings will be disseminated through international peer-reviewed scientific journals and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04795843.

Favorable Patient-Reported Outcomes and High Return to Sport Rates Following Hip Arthroscopy in Adolescent Athletes: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the existing literature surrounding hip arthroscopy in the adolescent athlete population to determine patient-reported outcomes, return to sport rates, complications, and reoperations associated with this intervention.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library, and Embase according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they were published in English with greater than 2 participants, contained patients aged 10-19 years old or classified as "high school athletes" or "middle school athletes," and reported postoperative patient-reported outcomes and return to sport. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and their associated P values were recorded. Finally, return-to-sport outcomes and sports played were also extracted from the included studies. Weighted kappa was used to assess inter-reviewer agreement.

RESULTS

Eleven studies included in the final analysis, resulting in 344 patients and 408 hips were analyzed by this review. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were reported in all studies. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was used in all but 1 study. Six of the 11 studies reported a 100% return-to-sport rate, for a total of 98/98 athletes returning to sport. Fabricant et al. did note that a majority of athletes who returned to sport were able to do so at a subjective "nearly normal" level. Only 4 of the studies reported complications, with the majority being transient neuropraxias.

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescent athletes who undergo hip arthroscopy demonstrate favorable postoperative patient-reported outcome scores, high rates of return to sport, and an overall low complication rate. The heterogeneity in both surgical methodology and outcome measures used for evaluation and treatment leads to continued ambiguity with regard to the optimal method for managing adolescent athletes with hip pathology.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V, systematic review of Level II-V studies.

The minimal clinically important difference for the nonarthritic hip score at 2-years following hip arthroscopy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine and establish the MCID for the NAHS at 2 years in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

METHODS

Patients that underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between 2010 and 2016 were analyzed for eligibility. Data were collected from a single surgeon's hip arthroscopy database. MCID was calculated for the NAHS utilizing a distribution-based method.

RESULTS

The study included 298 patients (184 females) with an average age of 40.4 ± 13.0 years and average body mass index (BMI) of 25.7 ± 4.2 kg/m². At baseline, the cohort's average NAHS score was 48.7 ± 13.6 and demonstrated an improvement of 36.5 ± 17.0 for NAHS at follow-up. This resulted in MCID values of + 8.5 for NAHS.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to report the MCID (+ 8.5) for NAHS following primary hip arthroscopy, and as such, is a valuable contribution to future hip arthroscopy research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Patient-reported outcome scores following patellar instability surgery-high prevalence does not equal high responsiveness: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the utilization and responsiveness of common patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients undergoing surgery for patellar instability.

METHODS

Using PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of studies reporting outcomes following surgical intervention for patellar instability was conducted using Pubmed, Cochrane, OVID Medline, and Google Scholar. Subgroup analysis of articles reporting at least two PROs with baseline and follow-up data were used to evaluate responsiveness of instruments using relative efficiency and effect size.

RESULTS

From the search, 2,848 unique articles were found, of which 178 were included in final analysis (7,122 patients, mean age 22.6, 63.6% female). The most commonly used PRO was the Kujala score (79.2%), followed by the Lysholm (34.8%), and Tegner (30.9%). Seventy-nine articles were eligible for subgroup analysis. The Kujala had a higher relative efficiency than ten of the 14 instruments to which it was compared but had lower relative efficiency compared to the IKDC and Lysholm scores. The Banff Patella Instability Instrument (BPII) and the Norwich score, condition-specific tools, were unable to be fully assessed due to rarity of use and lack of comparisons.

CONCLUSION

The hypothesis that the Kujala score is the most commonly used PRO for patellar instability, although other instruments offer greater efficiency was supported by our results. The IKDC and Lysholm scores had similar effect sizes but higher relative efficiencies than the Kujala, thus suggesting better responsiveness. This analysis adds useful information for surgeons on the effectiveness of the most common PRO's for evaluating patellofemoral instability outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic synovectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy of pigmented villonodular synovitis of the hip: a case series of single center

Background

Though radiotherapy has been widely used for knee pigmented villonodular synovitis (PVNS), there is few literatures about radiotherapy for the treatment of PVNS hip. Thus, the purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical outcomes of endoscopic synovectomy with/without radiotherapy postoperatively of PVNS hip.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent endoscopy in our hospital from November 2010 to January 2021. Inclusion criteria was patients with magnetic resonance image (MRI) signs, endoscopic findings and/or histological evidence of PVNS. Exclusion criteria was patients lost follow-up. All patients underwent synovectomy endoscopically and were divided into two groups depending on receiving postoperative radiotherapy or not. The primary outcome measurements were the recurrence of PVNS, receiving revision, and/or converting to total hip arthroplasty (THA). The secondary outcome measurements were the patient-reported outcome (PRO) collected at pre- and post-operation, which consist of Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (IHOT-12), Non-arthritic Hip Scale (NAHS), and visual analog scale (VAS).

Results

In a case series of 16 patients (8 cases of male, 50%), 4 (25%) cases were localized type and 12 (75%) cases were diffuse type. The average follow-up was 44.8 ± 38.2 months (range,3 to 110). 8 (50%) cases (6 diffuse cases and 2 localized cases) received radiotherapy postoperatively, and the rest (6 diffuse cases and 2 localized cases) received endoscopic treatment alone. At the latest follow-up, 3 (18.75%) cases (2 diffuse cases and 1 localized case) who did not receive radiotherapy converted to arthroplasty. The preoperative HOS-ADL, mHHS, IHOT-12, NAHS, VAS scores of remaining 13 patients were 63.1 ± 19.1 (range,32.0 to 98.8), 54.8 ± 20.1 (range, 10.0 to 77.0), 50.9 ± 15.4 (range, 31.0 to 76.6),51.6 ± 15.9 (range, 20.0 to 84.4), 6.0 ± 1.4 (range,4.0 to 8.0) points, respectively. The latest HOS-ADL, mHHS, IHOT-12, NAHS, VAS scores of the 13 patients were 79.7 ± 10.8 (range, 58.0 to 97.6), 78.6 ± 9.1 (range,55.0 to 87.0), 74.7 ± 9.7 (range, 55.6 to 91.0), 78.9 ± 18.7 (range,20.0 to 92.5), 3.1 ± 1.2 (range,2.0 to 6.0) points respectively.

Conclusion

Endoscopic synovectomy can achieve satisfactory PRO in PVNS hip patients. Besides, postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy can achieve higher hip survivability than synovectomy alone in this present study.

Collection of the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 Using a Smartphone Application Format Is Faster and Preferred When Compared With the Paper Version: A Pilot Study of rHip

Purpose

To evaluate the agreeability between the mobile application-based International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) survey with the paper version, as well as compare the time it takes patients each of the versions, and patient preferences between the two.

Methods

Patients seen with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement syndrome were prospectively enrolled in February 2019 and completed both the paper and application-based iHOT-12, in randomized order. Outcomes scores and time to completion were recorded for each version, and patients were also asked which they preferred. Intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to assess for absolute agreement between the 2 versions. Bland–Altman plots were constructed to evaluate the agreeability between paper and application-based iHOT-12 scores. Bland–Altman plots were evaluated to identify systematic bias and data stratification was performed to identify sequence bias between the application and paper-based collection modalities.

Results

Twenty-nine patients (aged15-56 years) completed both the paper and application-based versions of the iHOT-12. Between the application-based and paper versions, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.98, and Bland–Altman analysis showed agreement without bias between versions. There was no sequence bias. Accounting for completion order, the application-based iHOT-12 was faster for patients when compared to the paper version (61.4 ± 20.3 vs 71.9 ± 23.6 seconds, P = .02). Twenty-two patients reported a version preference where 19 of 22 (86%) chose application-based (P < .001).

Conclusions

The application-based iHOT-12 demonstrated absolute agreement with the paper iHOT-12, and is faster for patients to complete. Patients preferred using the application-based iHOT-12 over the paper-based version. Application-based PROs allow for collection of patient data at more frequent time points, which may be helpful in tracking the recovery progress of patients and predicting outcomes.

Clinical Relevance

As electronic-based outcome surveys become more common, it is important to know how the results may differ from traditional paper-based surveys.

Intraoperative Findings and Clinical Outcomes Associated With Arthroscopic Management of Subspine Impingement: A Propensity-Matched, Controlled Study

PURPOSE

(1) To investigate intra-articular damage in the hip joint associated with subspine impingement (SSI); (2) to evaluate clinical outcomes of arthroscopic treatment of hips with SSI; and (3) to compare the findings and outcomes to a control group without SSI.

METHODS

Eligible patients had arthroscopic treatment for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) concurrent with SSI between January 2015 and December 2017. Inclusion criteria consisted of preoperative and minimum 2-year patient-reported outcomes and preoperative measurements for Tönnis, lateral center edge angle, and alpha angle. Included patients were propensity-matched in a 1:3 ratio to patients who had FAI without SSI. Patient-reported outcomes were compared between groups. Minimal clinically important difference was calculated for modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS).

RESULTS

Fifty SSI cases were matched to 150 patients who had FAI without SSI. A greater proportion of the SSI cohort required labral reconstruction (P = .010). The size and locations for labral tears and chondral defects were comparable between groups (P > .05). Both groups demonstrated similar minimum 2-year outcomes for mHHS (P = .103), Nonarthritic Hip Score (P = .200), HOS-SSS (P = .119), visual analog scale (P = .231), international Hip Outcome Tool-12 (P =.300), Short Form-12 Mental (P = .426), Short Form-12 Physical (P = .328), Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, Mental (P = .419), and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, Physical (P = .316). The percentage of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference for mHHS and HOS-SSS was similar (P > .05). Survivorship was 96.0% and 98.7% for the SSI and control cohorts at 2 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic treatment of hips with SSI with subspine decompression and concomitant treatment of labral tears and FAI yielded significant improvement in patients' outcomes, which compared favorably with the control group. SSI may correlate with more complex labral tears, not amenable to repair, and complete tears of the ligamentum teres. Other findings, such as location and size of intra-articular damage, were similar between the cohorts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, case-control study.

Rehabilitation Protocol After Hip Arthroscopy: A 2015-2020 Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Although many rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy have been described, there is still significant variability about duration, goals, restrictions, and techniques to apply by the physical therapy after the surgical procedure. The aim of the study was to systematically review rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy.

DESIGN

The data sources were PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were used for the systematic review. Level I-IV evidence clinical studies and clinical reviews that focused on rehabilitation protocols after hip arthroscopy have been used as study eligibility criteria. Major limitations include the retrospective nature of most of the studies selected (level IV evidence) and the use of different clinical scores to report the outcomes.

RESULTS

This review showed that although a standardized guideline on rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy is still missing, the most recent studies and clinical trials are focusing on a four-phase program, which includes goals, recommendations, and a progression of exercises.

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation after hip arthroscopy is strongly suggested, but different authors recommended different rehabilitation programs. There is not a defined program, but as of today, the current standard of care is composed of phase-based programs.

Defining the Maximum Outcome Improvement of the Modified Harris Hip Score, the Nonarthritic Hip Score, the Visual Analog Scale For Pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 in the Arthroscopic Management for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome and Labral Tear

PURPOSE

To determine the respective percent thresholds for achieving the maximal outcome improvement (MOI) for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and the International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12) that were associated with satisfaction following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral tear, and to identify preoperative predictors of reaching the mHHS, NAHS, VAS, and the iHOT-12 thresholds for achieving the MOI.

METHODS

An anchor question was provided to patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between April 2008 and April 2019. Patients were included if they answered the anchor question and had minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients were excluded if they had a previous ipsilateral hip surgery, a Tönnis grade >1, hip dysplasia, or a previous hip condition. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine the thresholds for the percentage of the MOI predictive of satisfaction. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predictors of achieving the MOI threshold.

RESULTS

In total, 407 hips (375 patients) were included, with 279 female patients (68.6%). The average age, body mass index, and follow-up time were 38.8 ± 13.7 years, 26.6 ± 5.8, and 51.8 ± 33.2 months, respectively. Satisfaction with the current state of their hip was reported in 77.9% (317) of the cases. It was determined that 54.8%, 52.5%, 55.5%, and 55.8% of MOI were the thresholds for maximal predictability of satisfaction for mHHS, NAHS, VAS, and iHOT-12, respectively. Predictors of achieving MOI were not identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Following hip arthroscopy in the context of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral tear, the thresholds for achieving the MOI for the mHHS, NAHS, VAS for pain, and iHOT-12 were 54.8%, 52.5%, 55.5%, and 55.8% respectively. No preoperative predictors of achieving the MOI were identified.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, case-series.

Comparing Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

BACKGROUND

There is much debate in the current literature with regard to the most appropriate hip-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurement for assessment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and outcomes after surgical treatment. Despite systematic reviews assessing the validity of classic hip-specific PROs as well as newer PROs developed to target the young, active population, there lacks a direct comparison of the question content between each PRO.

PURPOSE

To compare the question composition and degree of overlap between commonly used PROs for FAIS.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

A literature review yielded the 6 most commonly cited PROs for assessment of FAIS: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33), and Hip Outcome Score (HOS). Questions from each PRO were classified as identical, similar, or unique after pooled comparison, and the number of overlapping (identical or similar) questions between each PRO was determined. Questions were then classified into 5 domains: pain, symptoms, functional activities, sports, and quality of life, and variations in questions assessing each domain based on PRO were analyzed.

RESULTS

Analysis of 164 total questions from 6 PROs showed that 87 questions (53%) were identical between 2 or more PROs, 39 (24%) were similar, and 38 (23%) were unique. The iHOT-33 contained the highest number of unique questions, with 13 of 33 (39.4%), while the HOOS contained the lowest number of unique questions, with 3 of 40 (7.5%). The HOOS, HAGOS, and iHOT-33 contained questions assessing all 5 domains of patient outcomes; the NAHS did not evaluate quality of life; the mHHS only assessed pain, symptoms, and functional activities; and the HOS only assessed functional activities and sports.

CONCLUSION

As there is a high percentage of overlapping (identical or similar) questions between the most commonly used hip-specific PROs for FAIS, multiple tests may be appropriate for use. The iHOT-33, HOOS, and HAGOS are well suited for the general population as they offer comprehensive assessments across all domains, while the HOS provides added focus to sports/activity assessments for athletes and highly active patients.

Responsiveness of patient-reported outcomes in shoulder arthroplasty: what are we actually measuring?

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and responsiveness of common patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools in patients undergoing primary total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for glenohumeral arthritis.

METHODS

Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review of anatomic and reverse TSA studies from PubMed, SportDiscus, Cochrane, and CINAHL was performed. Studies on primary TSA for glenohumeral arthritis that reported at least 1 PRO tool were included in the final analysis. A subgroup analysis of studies that reported preoperative and postoperative PRO scores with at least 2-year follow-up data was evaluated to compare the responsiveness between the different PRO instruments.

RESULTS

After full-text review of 490 articles, 74 articles met all inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Anatomic TSA was evaluated in 35 studies, reverse TSA in 32 studies, and both anatomic and reverse in 7 studies. There were a total of 7624 patients, and 25 different PRO tools were used. The most commonly reported PRO tools were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (44 studies), Constant (42 studies), the visual analog scale for pain (23 studies), and the Simple Shoulder Test (17 studies). A median of 3.0 PRO instruments were used in each study. All instruments had large effect sizes. The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) score was found to be the most responsive instrument, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was least responsive. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was the most responsive instrument that required only patient-reported data.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the UCLA score was found to be the most responsive followed by the Adjusted Constant. However, both the UCLA and Adjusted Constant scores require strength and range of motion assessment that may limit their widespread clinical use. The increased responsiveness of these measures, which include objective clinical testing, speaks to the predicted increases in strength and range of motion after shoulder arthroplasty. Of the measures that can be administered without in-person clinical evaluation, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder index were the most responsive.

The Blight of the Type II Error: When No Difference Does Not Mean No Difference

Much focus in research has been given to minimizing type I errors, where we incorrectly conclude that there is a difference between 2 treatments or populations. In contrast, our standard scientific method and power analysis allows for a much greater rate of type II errors, in which we fail to show a difference when, in fact, one exists (≥20% rate of type II errors vs ≤5% rate of type I errors). Additional factors that can cause type II errors may propel their prevalence to well in excess of 20%. Failure to reject the null hypothesis may be a tolerable outcome in a certain proportion of studies. However, type II errors may become dangerous when the conclusions of a study overreach, incorrectly stating that there is no difference, when, in fact, a difference exists. Type II errors resulting in overreaching conclusions may impede incremental advances in our field, as the advantages of small improvements may go undetected. To avert this danger in studies that fail to meet statistical significance, we as researchers (20% or more, vs 5% for type I errors) be precise in our conclusions stating simply that the null hypothesis could not be rejected.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Validation in Hip Arthroscopy: A Shift Towards Reducing Survey Burden

Background The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed to provide measures of patient-reported symptoms and healthcare outcomes across a variety of conditions in an easily accessible manner. The purpose of this study was to validate PROMIS against traditional legacy measures in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoral acetabular impingement (FAI). Methodology Outcome measures collected pre- and post-operatively included PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) and Physical Function (PF), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living and Sport (HOS-ADL and HOS-Sport), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated between each outcome measure. Results Strong correlations were observed between the PROMIS PF T-Score and the mHHS (r = 0.64-0.83, p < 0.0001), HOS-ADL (r = 0.54-0.81, p < 0.0001), HOS-Sport (r = 0.55-0.74, p < 0.0001), and NAHS (r = 0.61-0.78, p < 0.0001) measurement tools. PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing PI T-Score and VAS also demonstrated a strong correlation (r = 0.64-0.80, p < 0.0001). Conclusions PROMIS PF scores correlate strongly with mHHS, HOS-ADL, HOS-Sport, and NAHS scores at all time points. Likewise, PROMIS PI scores correlate strongly with VAS pain scores. On average, patients completing PROMIS need to fill out only four or five questions. This study supports the use of PROMIS as an efficient, valid outcome tool for patients with FAI undergoing hip arthroscopy.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Clinically Important Outcome Values in Hip Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Defining success in hip arthroscopy through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is complicated by the wide range of available questionnaires and overwhelming amount of information on how to interpret scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) are collectively known as clinically important outcome values (CIOVs). These CIOVs provide benchmarks for meaningful improvement. The aims of this review were to update the evidence regarding joint-specific PROMs used for hip arthroscopy and to collate available CIOVs in this population.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed to identify studies reporting measurement properties of PROMs utilized for hip arthroscopy. Metrics of reliability, validity, and responsiveness were extracted and graded according to an international Delphi study. Questionnaire interpretability was evaluated through CIOVs.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were reviewed. One study validated a novel questionnaire, 3 studies validated existing questionnaires, and 22 studies reported CIOVs. The most evidence supporting interpretability was found for the Hip Outcome Score (HOS, 11 studies), modified Harris hip score (mHHS, 10 studies), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12, 9 studies). Scores indicative of the smallest perceptible versus substantial clinically relevant changes were reported for the iHOT-12 (12 to 15 versus 22 to 28), iHOT-33 (10 to 12 versus 25 to 26), HOS-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL, 9 to 10 versus 10 to 16), HOS-Sports (14 to 15 versus 25 to 30), and mHHS (7 to 13 versus 20 to 23). Absolute postoperative scores indicative of an unsatisfactory versus a desirable outcome were reported for the iHOT-12 (below 56 to 63 versus above 86 to 88), iHOT-33 (below 58 versus above 64 to 82), HOS-ADL (below 87 to 92 versus above 94), HOS-Sports (below 72 to 80 versus above 78 to 86), and mHHS (below 74 to 85 versus above 83 to 95).

CONCLUSIONS

Six questionnaires had reported clinically important outcome thresholds, with the HOS, mHHS, and iHOT-12 having the most information to support score interpretation. Thresholds for the HOS, mHHS, iHOT-12, and iHOT-33 describe desirable absolute PROM scores and minimum and substantial change scores within 5 years following hip arthroscopy. Despite substantial heterogeneity in calculation methodology, included cohorts, and follow-up time, available interpretability values could be meaningfully summarized.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In light of increasing use of PROMs in orthopaedics, a summary of the available CIOVs provides guidance for clinicians in mapping numerical scores from PROMs onto clinical benchmarks.

Fast Starters and Slow Starters After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement: Correlation of Early Postoperative Pain and 2-Year Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Patients experience varying degrees of pain and symptoms during the early recovery period after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). Some "fast starters" report minimal discomfort and are eager to advance activities, while "slow starters" describe severe pain and limitations. The relationship between these early postoperative symptoms and 2-year outcomes after hip arthroscopy is unknown.

PURPOSE

To analyze the relationship between early postoperative pain and 2-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after hip arthroscopy for FAI.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Patients without arthritis or dysplasia who were undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAI were prospectively enrolled and completed validated PROs. Scores for visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were collected preoperatively and at 1 week, 6 weeks, and 2 years postoperatively. Scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) were collected preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Paired t tests were used to evaluate PRO score changes, and correlation analyses were used to assess relationships between early postoperative pain and 2-year postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients were included (55% female; mean ± SD age, 35.29 ± 9.6 years; mean body mass index, 25.07 ± 3.98 kg/m²). Patients demonstrated significant improvements in PRO scores (VAS, SF-12 Physical Component Score, mHHS, and all HOOS subscales) at 2 years after hip arthroscopy for FAI (P < .001). There was a significant correlation between lower 1-week VAS pain level (fast starters) and lower 2-year VAS pain level (R = 0.31; P < .001) as well as higher 2-year PRO scores (SF-12 Physical Component Score, mHHS, and all HOOS subscales: R = -0.21 to -0.3; P < .001). There was no correlation between 1-week VAS pain and 2-year SF-12 Mental Component Score (P = .17). Preoperative VAS pain levels showed positive correlations with 1-week postoperative pain scores (R = 0.39; P < .001) and negative correlations with 2-year patient outcomes (R = -0.15 to -0.33, P < .01). There was no correlation between 6-week postoperative pain scores and 2-year PRO scores.

CONCLUSION

Fast starters after hip arthroscopy for FAI experience sustained improvements in outcomes at 2 years after surgery. Patient pain levels before surgery may delineate potential fast starters and slow starters.

Psychometric properties of visual analog scale assessments for function, pain, and strength compared with disease-specific upper extremity outcome measures in rotator cuff repair

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are being increasingly used in orthopedic surgery; however, there is significant variability and burden associated with their administration. The visual analog scale (VAS) for function, strength, and pain may represent a simple and efficient way to measure outcomes, specifically after rotator cuff repair (RCR) surgery.

PURPOSE

To define the efficiency and longitudinal psychometric properties of VAS instruments assessing function, strength, and pain after RCR.

METHODS

Single-question VAS measures assessing function, strength, and pain as a percentage of normal were administered alongside legacy PROMs in patients undergoing RCR. VAS and PROMs were administered at preoperative, 6- and 12-month time points between June 2017 and April 2018. An electronic registry was used to examine time-to-completion data. PROM performance was assessed using Spearman correlation coefficients. Both absolute and relative floor and ceiling effects were examined. Effect size was measured at 6 and 12 months through the calculation of Cohen's d coefficient. Receiver-operating curves with area under the curve calculations were used to determine the ability of preoperative VAS scores in predicting minimally clinically important difference achievement on American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES).

RESULTS

A total of 190 patients (55.6 ± 10.9 years, 66.9% male) met criteria. The 3 VAS PROMs required less time to complete than ASES (1.36 ± 1.12 vs. 5.17 ± 2.39) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity v2.0 (UE) Computer Adaptive Test (1.72 ± 1.48). Compared with ASES, VAS function, strength, and pain demonstrated fair correlations preoperatively (r = 0.44-0.46) that improved to good at 6 months (r = 0.61-0.67) and further improved at 1 year (r = 0.62-0.78). The performance of VAS measures with other function PROMs was comparable with performance relative to ASES, with poor to very good correlations preoperatively (r = 0.21-0.62) that improved to good to excellent by 1 year (r = 0.62-0.94). A significant relative ceiling effect was demonstrated by PROMIS UE at 12 months (16.9%). Large effect sizes were demonstrated by the ASES, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Constant, PROMIS UE, and VAS function and strength instruments (Cohen d ≥ 0.8).

CONCLUSION

Single-question VAS assessments for function, strength, and pain are an efficient means for assessing outcome in RCR surgery and may be particularly useful in the postoperative setting. VAS instruments collectively trended toward floor effects preoperatively, suggesting that legacy instruments may more appropriately establish preoperative baselines. However, in the postoperative setting, VAS instruments demonstrate good-to-excellent correlation, minimized time-to-completion, and no appreciable floor or ceiling effects.

Correlation of the Subjective Hip Value with Validated Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements for the Hip

Background: The subjective hip value (SHV) was developed as a patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) that is easily and quickly performed and interpreted. The SHV is defined as a patient’s subjective hip measurement tool expressed as a percentage of an entirely normal hip joint, which would score 100%. The hypothesis is that results of the subjective hip value correlate with the results of the modified Harris hip score and the International Hip Outcome Tool in patients with hip-related diseases. Methods: 302 patients completed the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHot-33) as well as the SHV. The SHV consist of only one question: “What is the overall percent value of your hip if a completely normal hip represents 100%?”. The patients were divided into five different groups depending on the diagnosis. Pearson correlation was used to evaluate the correlation between the different PROMs and linear regression analysis was used to calculate R². Results: 302 complete datasets were available for evaluation. There was a high correlation between the SHV and the iHOT-33 (r = 0.847; r² = 0.692, p < 0.001) and the mHHS (r = 0.832; r² = 0.717, p < 0.001). The SHV showed a medium (r = 0.653) to high (r = 0.758) correlation with the mHHS and the iHOT-33 in all diagnosis groups. Conclusion: The SHV offers a useful adjunct to established hip outcome measurements, as it is easily and quickly performed and interpreted. The SHV reflects the view of the patient and is independent of the diagnosis. Further research with prospective studies is needed to test the psychometric properties of the score.

Outcome reporting patterns in total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most effective ways to treat end-stage painful conditions of the knee. However, non-standardized reporting patterns can make quantitative analysis of patient outcomes difficult.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed using keywords "total knee arthroplasty" and "total knee replacement." Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) meeting the inclusion criteria were sorted and reviewed. Type of study, outcome measures used to report their results, and the actual results were recorded. Quantitative analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 233 RCTs were included. There was significant variability in the reporting of short term and long term outcomes in total knee arthroplasty. The most common treatment domains in order of decreasing frequency were objective knee function, subjective knee function, perioperative complications, and pain. Range of motion was the most common outcome metric reported in all the RCTs and also was the most common metric used to assess objective knee function. The most common patient reported outcome measure used to assess postoperative function was the Knee Society Score followed by Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. The Visual Analog Scale was the most common measurement tool used to assess postoperative pain. Most studies assessed patient outcomes in three treatment domains. None reported outcomes in all seven domains.

CONCLUSION

There is significant variability in outcome reporting patterns in TKA literature. Most studies do not track outcomes comprehensively, with a significant minority of the RCTs tracking outcomes in only one treatment domain.

PROMIS Versus Legacy Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients Undergoing Surgical Treatment for Symptomatic Acetabular Dysplasia

BACKGROUND

No previous study has investigated how the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) performs compared with legacy patient-reported outcome measures in patients with symptomatic acetabular dysplasia treated with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO).

PURPOSE

To (1) measure the strength of correlation between the PROMIS and legacy outcome measures and (2) assess floor and ceiling effects of the PROMIS and legacy outcome measures in patients treated with PAO for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

This study included 220 patients who underwent PAO for the treatment of symptomatic acetabular dysplasia. Outcome measures included the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) pain, HOOS activities of daily living (ADL), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), PROMIS pain, and PROMIS physical function subsets, with scores collected preoperatively and/or postoperatively at a minimum 12-month follow-up. The change in mean scores from preoperatively to postoperatively was calculated only in a subgroup of 57 patients with scores at both time points. Distributions of the PROMIS and legacy scores were compared to evaluate floor and ceiling effects, and Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate agreement.

RESULTS

The mean age at the time of surgery was 27.7 years, and 83.6% were female. The mean follow-up time was 1.5 years. Preoperatively, neither the PROMIS nor the legacy measures showed significant floor or ceiling effects. Postoperatively, all legacy measures showed significant ceiling effects, with 15% of patients with a maximum HOOS pain score of 100, 29% with a HOOS ADL score of 100, and 21% with an mHHS score of 100. The PROMIS and legacy instruments showed good agreement preoperatively and postoperatively. The PROMIS pain had a moderate to strong negative correlation with the HOOS pain (r = -0.66; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = -0.60; P < .0001) preoperatively and the HOOS pain (r = -0.64; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = -0.64; P < .0001) postoperatively. The PROMIS physical function had a moderate positive correlation with the HOOS ADL (r = 0.51; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = 0.49; P < .0001) preoperatively and a stronger correlation postoperatively with the HOOS ADL (r = 0.56; P < .0001) and mHHS (r = 0.56; P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

We found good agreement between PROMIS and legacy scores preoperatively and postoperatively. PROMIS scores were largely normally distributed, demonstrating an expanded ability to capture variability in patients with improved outcomes after treatment.

Application of Machine Learning for Predicting Clinically Meaningful Outcome After Arthroscopic Femoroacetabular Impingement Surgery

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy has become an important tool for surgical treatment of intra-articular hip pathology. Predictive models for clinically meaningful outcomes in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) are unknown.

PURPOSE

To apply a machine learning model to determine preoperative variables predictive for achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 2 years after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Data were analyzed for patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS by a high-volume fellowship-trained surgeon between January 2012 and July 2016. The MCID cutoffs for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), HOS-Sport Specific (HOS-SS), and modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) were 9.8, 14.4, and 9.14, respectively. Predictive models for achieving the MCID with respect to each were built with the LASSO algorithm (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) for feature selection, followed by logistic regression on the selected features. Study data were analyzed with PatientIQ, a cloud-based research and analytics platform for health care.

RESULTS

Of 1103 patients who met inclusion criteria, 898 (81.4%) had a minimum of 2-year reported outcomes and were entered into the modeling algorithm. A total of 74.0%, 73.5%, and 79.9% met the HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, and mHHS threshold scores for achieving the MCID. Predictors of not achieving the HOS-ADL MCID included anxiety/depression, symptom duration for >2 years before surgery, higher body mass index, high preoperative HOS-ADL score, and preoperative hip injection (all P < .05). Predictors of not achieving the HOS-SS MCID included anxiety/depression, preoperative symptom duration for >2 years, high preoperative HOS-SS score, and preoperative hip injection, while running at least at the recreational level was a predictor of achieving HOS-SS MCID (all P < .05). Predictors of not achieving the mHHS MCID included history of anxiety or depression, high preoperative mHHS score, and hip injections, while being female was predictive of achieving the MCID (all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

This study identified predictive variables for achieving clinically meaningful outcome after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. Patient factors including anxiety/depression, symptom duration >2 years, preoperative intra-articular injection, and high preoperative outcome scores are most consistently predictive of inability to achieve clinically meaningful outcome. These findings have important implications for shared decision-making algorithms and management of preoperative expectations after hip arthroscopy for FAI.

Exploring the validation of a Japanese version of the International Hip Outcome Tool 12: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness

BACKGROUNDS

The International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT12) was authorized by the Multicenter Arthroscopy of the Hip Outcomes Research Network (MAHORN). iHOT12 is increasingly being adopted in orthopedic studies to report patient outcomes. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the International Hip Outcome Tools "iHOT12J", and to establish its reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

METHODS

To assess test-retest reliability, an identical set of patients reported outcome measures with five qualitative scoring measures including iHOT12; these were filled out by each patient twice. Reliability was explored using Cronbachss alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient. The Bland-Altman plot was used to explore the absolute agreement. To evaluate validity, we examined the relationships between SF36 and iHOT12. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the smallest detectable change to the minimal important change by applying an anchor-based approach.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (51 joints) were analyzed from March 2016 to October 2017 in Japanese four facility. The Cronbach α coefficient was 0.90 and the average value of intraclass coefficient (ICC) was 0.89. Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a solid agreement. Regarding the validity, the Spearman rank correlation coefficients were strong with PF (r = 0.69, p < 0.01), BP (r = 0.71, p < 0.01) and PCS (r = 0.69, p < 0.01). The smallest detectable change (3.19) was smaller than the minimum important change (12.40).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed iHOT12J, which seems to show sufficient reliability, validity, and responsiveness. We believe that this patient reported outcome measure is beneficial in studying Japanese patients with femoroacetabular impingement.

Relationship Between PROMIS Computer Adaptive Tests and Legacy Hip Measures Among Patients Presenting to a Tertiary Care Hip Preservation Center

BACKGROUND

Legacy hip outcome measures may be burdensome to patients and sometimes yield floor or ceiling effects. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive tests (CATs) allow for low-burden data capture and limited ceiling and floor effects.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the PROMIS CAT domains demonstrate correlation against commonly used legacy patient-reported outcome measures in a population of patients presenting to a tertiary care hip preservation center. The authors hypothesized the following: (1) PROMIS CAT scores based on physical function (PF), pain interference (PIF), pain behavior, and pain intensity would show strong correlation with the following legacy scores: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), Hip Outcome Score (HOS) Sports and Activities of Daily Living subscales, and Veterans RAND-6D (VR-6D) utility measure. (2) The mental and physical health portions of the VR-6D legacy measure would show weak correlation with mental- and psychosocial-specific PROMIS elements-depression, anxiety, fatigue, sleep, and ability to participate in social roles and activities. (3) All PROMIS measures would exhibit fewer floor and ceiling effects than legacy scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Prospective data were collected on 125 patients in the hip preservation clinics. Enrollees completed legacy scores (visual analog scale for pain, mHHS, iHOT-12, HOS, and VR-6D) and PROMIS CAT questionnaires (PF, PIF, pain behavior, anxiety, depression, sleep, social roles and activities, pain intensity, fatigue). Spearman rank correlations were calculated, with r_s values of 0 to 0.3 indicating negligible correlation; 0.3 to 0.5, weak correlation; 0.5 to 0.7, moderately strong correlation; and >0.7, strong correlation. Floor and ceiling effects were evaluated.

RESULTS

As anticipated, the PF-CAT yielded strong correlations with the iHOT-12, mHHS, HOS-Sports, HOS-Activities of Daily Living, and VR-6D, with r_s values of 0.76, 0.71, 0.81, 0.87, and 0.71, respectively. The PIF-CAT was the only pain score to show moderately strong to strong correlation with all 14 patient-reported outcome measures. A strong correlation was observed between the VR-6D and the social roles and activities CAT ( r_s = 0.73). The depression CAT had a significant floor effect at 19%. No additional floor or ceiling effect was present for any other legacy or PROMIS measure.

CONCLUSION

The PF-CAT shows strong correlation with legacy patient-reported outcome scores among patients presenting to a tertiary care hip preservation center. The PIF-CAT also correlates strongly with legacy and PROMIS measures evaluating physical and mental well-being. PROMIS measures are less burdensome and demonstrate no floor or ceiling effects, making them a potential alternative to legacy patient-reported outcome measures for the hip.

Predictors of Persistent Postoperative Pain at Minimum 2 Years After Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement

BACKGROUND

Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) is a rapidly expanding field, and preoperative factors predictive of persistent postoperative pain are currently unknown.

PURPOSE

To identify predictors for persistent postoperative pain at the site of surgery after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for FAIS and had a minimum 2-year follow-up with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were included in this study. Patients with previous open hip surgery and diagnoses other than FAIS were excluded. Patients were grouped by visual analog scale scores for pain as limited (<30) and persistent (≥30). Patient factors and outcomes were analyzed with univariate and correlation analyses to build a logistic regression model to identify predictors of persistent postoperative pain.

RESULTS

The limited pain (n = 514) and persistent pain (n = 174) groups totaled 688 patients (449 females). There was a statistically significant difference in age between groups, with the persistent pain group being older than the low pain group (35.9 ± 12.2 vs 32.4 ± 12.6, respectively; P = .002). Patients with persistent postoperative pain demonstrated significantly lower preoperative PRO scores in the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (57.6 ± 21.2 vs 67.7 ± 16.8), Hip Outcome Score-Sport Specific (35.9 ± 23.9 vs 44.1 ± 22.7), modified Harris Hip Score (51.6 ± 16.2 vs 59.6 ± 12.9), and International Hip Outcome Tool (32.0 ± 16.8 vs 40.0 ± 17.82) but no significant differences in preoperative visual analog scale scores for pain (7.3 ± 1.8 vs 7.2 ± 1.7). Mean postoperative PRO differences between pain groups were all statistically significant. Bivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that history of anxiety or depression (odds ratio, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.02-3.32; P = .042), revision hip arthroscopy (odds ratio, 8.6; 95% CI, 1.79-40.88; P = .007), and a low preoperative modified Harris Hip Score (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .30) were predictors of persistent postoperative pain.

CONCLUSION

Independent predictors for persistent postoperative pain include revision hip arthroscopy and mental health history positive for anxiety and depression. Our analysis demonstrated significant improvements in pain and functional PROs in the limited pain and persistent pain groups; however, those with persistent pain demonstrated significantly lower PRO scores.

Editorial Commentary: Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy-Am I Better, Improved, or Who Knows?

Patient-reported outcomes are critical in the evaluation of the success of hip arthroscopy. Many different outcome scores are currently being used; however, that is a totally different subject. Most scores range from 0 to 100 or use some type of scale. The question becomes, Is a good outcome a score of 70 or 90? In many cases, it depends on the patient and his or her personal experiences. One way we gauge whether the patient is better is to use summary scores, which provide us with general goals for improvement. These include the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit. While these are being defined, they can be used to help gauge patients' progress and provide improved treatment of patients.

How Long Does It Take for Patients to Complete PROMIS Scores?: An Assessment of PROMIS CAT Questionnaires Administered at an Ambulatory Sports Medicine Clinic

Background:

Challenges exist in routinely collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from patients at a busy ambulatory clinic. A number of validated Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) subdomains allow for efficient PRO administration.

Purpose:

To determine the time to completion (TTC) of 3 PROMIS computer adaptive test (CAT) scores. CAT questionnaires were administered at the ambulatory clinic with the following PROMIS subdomains: Pain Interference (PI), Depression, and Physical Function for lower extremity (PF) or for upper extremity (UE). The secondary purpose was to determine the influence of patient demographic factors on TTC.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Patients were recruited from 3 fellowship-trained upper extremity and sports medicine orthopaedic surgery clinics. PROMIS CAT questionnaires were administered to consecutive patients during the study period (July 2017–September 2017). The start and completion times of each CAT were recorded. The primary outcome of interest was TTC of the questionnaires. Patients were stratified into age quartiles to determine the impact of age on TTC. Patient demographic information, such as sex, race, and ethnicity, was determined retroactively.

Results:

A total of 1178 questionnaire sets consisting of 3658 individual PROMIS forms were analyzed. The mean TTC was 3.29 minutes for all 4 forms in aggregate, with PROMIS PI, PF, UE, and Depression taking on average 1.05, 0.74, 0.96, and 0.57 minutes to complete, respectively. Patients from the oldest age quartile (mean ± SD, 70.3 ± 7.5 years) had a statistically significant longer TTC as compared with the second quartile (41.2 ± 4.7 years) (3.70 vs 2.87 minutes; P < .05). Asian patients had the longest PROMIS PF TTC, while white patients completed PF with the shortest TTC (1.28 vs 0.68 minutes; P < .05). Patients of unstated ethnicity had a longer TTC for PF as compared with their Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino counterparts (0.91 vs 0.30 and 0.70 minutes; P < .05).

Conclusion:

PROMIS CAT forms are efficient tools for collecting patient-reported outcomes in the ambulatory orthopaedic surgery clinic. Older patients, Asian patients, and patients of unstated ethnicity took longer to complete the forms.

High Rate of Return to Swimming After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement

PURPOSE

To evaluate patients' ability to return to swimming after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) with capsular closure.

METHODS

Consecutive FAIS patients who had undergone hip arthroscopy for the treatment of FAIS by a single fellowship-trained surgeon were reviewed. The inclusion criteria included patients with a diagnosis of FAIS who self-reported being swimming athletes with a minimum clinical follow-up duration of 2 years. For all patients, we assessed demographic data; preoperative physical examination findings, imaging findings, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores including the modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living subscale, Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific subscale, and visual analog scale for pain; and postoperative examination findings and PROs at a minimum of 2 years after surgery, including a swimming-specific questionnaire.

RESULTS

The study included 26 patients (62% female patients; average age, 31.3 ± 7.2 years; average body mass index, 24.2 ± 2.7 kg/m²). Preoperatively, 24 patients (92%) were unable to swim at their preinjury level, and swimming was either decreased or discontinued entirely at an average of 6.0 ± 4.0 months before surgery. All 26 patients (100%) returned to swimming at an average of 3.4 ± 1.7 months after surgery, including 14 (54%) who returned at a higher level of performance than their preoperative state, 10 (38%) who returned to the same level, and 2 (7%) who returned at a lower level. The ability to return at a higher level of performance was not associated with age (P = .81), sex (P = .62), or body mass index (P = .16). At an average of 31.2 ± 4.95 months' follow-up, postoperative PRO scores improved significantly from preoperative values (Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living subscale from 68.5 ± 19.9 to 93.9 ± 5.7, P < .0001; Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific subscale from 44.0 ± 21.0 to 85.2 ± 16, P < .0001; and modified Harris Hip Score from 59.5 ± 12.1 to 94 ± 8.6, P < .0001). The average patient satisfaction level was 93% ± 9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Recreational and amateur swimmers return to swimming 100% of the time after hip arthroscopy for FAIS, with just over half returning at a higher level, and most of these patients return within 4 months after surgery. This information is critical in counseling patients on their expectations with respect to returning to swimming after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.