Defining Clinically Significant Improvement on the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Test at 1-Year Follow-up for Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Short-term Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopic Surgery in Patients Participating in Formal Physical Therapy Versus a Home Exercise Program: A Prospectively Enrolled Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Physical therapy is frequently utilized in the postoperative care of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS). There has been limited research into the efficacy of a structured home exercise program (HEP) compared with formal physical therapy (FPT) in this patient population.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of patients utilizing FPT versus an HEP after hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS. It was hypothesized that both groups would show similar improvements regarding outcome scores, which would improve significantly compared with their preoperative scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS at a single center between October 2020 and October 2021 were prospectively enrolled. Patients were allowed to self-select FPT or an HEP and were administered a survey preoperatively and at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively. The survey included the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, visual analog scale for pain, 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function, and patient satisfaction with physical therapy and overall care. Statistical analysis was conducted between the 2 groups and within groups to compare preoperative and postoperative scores.

RESULTS

The patients' mean age was 32.6 ± 10.4 years, with 47.2% being female and 57.4% choosing the HEP. At 12 months postoperatively, no significant differences were reported between the FPT and HEP groups regarding the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (P = .795), visual analog scale for pain score (P > .05), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function T-score (P = .699), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool score (P = .582), and patient satisfaction (P > .05). Outcome scores at 12 months postoperatively were significantly improved from the preoperative scores across all measures in both groups (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences regarding patient outcomes between FPT and the HEP at 1-year follow-up after hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS when patients selected their own treatment, with both groups demonstrating significant improvements in their outcome scores from their preoperative values. These findings suggest that a structured HEP may be a viable alternative to FPT after hip arthroscopic surgery in patients who prefer a self-directed rehabilitation program.

Females and Males Achieve Similar Improvement, Outcomes, and Survivorship Following Hip Arthroscopy with Labral and Capsular Repair for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome at Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of patient sex on 10-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship after hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary HA for FAIS with minimum 10-year follow-up from 1/2012-12/2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Female patients were propensity-matched to male patients in a 1:1 ratio by age and body mass index. PROs and rates of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) achievement were compared between cohorts. Rate of reoperation-free survivorship was compared between sexes.

RESULTS

One-hundred and twenty-one- females (age: 36.2 ± 12.3 years) were matched to 121 males (age: 35.7 ± 11.3 years, p = 0.594) at average follow-up of 10.4 ± 0.4 years. There were no differences in any preoperative demographic characteristics between the groups (p ≥ 0.187). Both groups demonstrated significant improvement in every PRO measure between the preoperative and 10-year postoperative time points (p < 0.001). The magnitude of improvement was similar between the groups for all PRO measures (p ≥ 0.139). At 10-years, female patients trended towards higher MCID achievement for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) than male patients (72.7% vs. 57.3%, p = 0.061), with otherwise similar MCID achievement rates. Females trended towards significantly lower HOS-Sports Subscale PASS achievement (65.4% vs. 77.1%, p = 0.121) with otherwise similar PASS achievement rates between the groups (p ≥ 0.170).

CONCLUSION

Female and male patients experienced similar improvement in PROs at ten-year follow-up. MCID and PASS achievement rates were predominantly similar between sexes. Survivorship did not differ between groups. Long-term success can be expected for appropriately indicated patients undergoing HA for FAIS, regardless of sex.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Retrospective Cohort Study.

Association of Patient Satisfaction 2 Years After Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome With Minimum 10-Year Patient-Reported Outcomes and Survivorship

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown that short-term outcomes after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) predict midterm outcomes, but a limited number of studies have evaluated whether short-term outcomes predict long-term outcomes and survivorship.

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether achieving clinically significant outcomes at 2 years after hip arthroscopy for FAIS can predict patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship at 10 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS between June 2012 and December 2012 with a minimum 10-year follow-up were identified. Using previously established thresholds, we classified patients who achieved the 2-year Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the visual analog scale (VAS) for satisfaction as the high satisfaction group and patients who did not as the low satisfaction group. Minimum 10-year PROs were then compared between the groups, including scores for the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living and -Sports Specific, the modified Harris Hip Score, the VAS for pain, and the VAS for satisfaction. Reoperation-free survivorship was compared.

RESULTS

Of 120 eligible consecutive patients, 85 patients were included (70.8% follow-up rate), of whom 61.2% were female. The mean age was 34.0 ± 12.8 years, and the mean body mass index was 25.4 ± 4.6. Of the 85 patients, 29 (34.1%) did not achieve PASS for the VAS for satisfaction at 2 years postoperatively compared with 56 (65.9%) who did. The low satisfaction group had significantly worse acetabular chondral grades at the time of surgery (P = .008). At minimum 10-year follow-up, the high satisfaction group showed significantly better HOS-Activities of Daily Living, HOS-Sports Specific, modified Harris Hip Score, VAS pain, and VAS satisfaction scores (P≤ .031). Compared with the low satisfaction group, the high satisfaction group had a significantly lower rate of secondary surgery (1.8% vs 24.1%, respectively; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

Patients who achieved PASS for the VAS for satisfaction at 2 years after hip arthroscopy demonstrated superior minimum 10-year outcomes compared with patients who did not, including greater PRO scores and a higher survivorship rate. The high satisfaction group had lower grade acetabular cartilage damage at the time of surgery compared with those who did not achieve PASS for the VAS for satisfaction at 2 years.

Primary and Revision Hip Arthroscopy in Borderline Hip Dysplasia Shows Comparable Outcomes at a Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs), achievement of clinically significant outcomes, and reoperation-free survivorship between primary and revision hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in propensity-matched borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) patients at a minimum 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

Patients with BHD, characterized by a lateral center-edge angle 18° to 25°, who underwent HA for FAIS with capsular repair by a single surgeon between January 2012 and June 2018 with a minimum 5-year follow-up were identified. Cases of revision HA were propensity-matched 1:2 to cases of primary HA, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index. A 1:2 ratio was chosen to maximize the number of included patients. Collected PROs included Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living and Sport Subscales, International Hip Outcome Score 12, modified Harris Hip Score, and Visual Analog Scale for Pain. Achievement of minimal clinically important difference, patient acceptable symptom state, and substantial clinical benefit for any measured PRO was compared between groups along with reoperation-free survivorship using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-six revision HA hips (34 patients) were propensity-matched to 72 primary HA hips (70 patients). The groups were similar in age (31.5 ± 10.3 years vs 30.5 ± 11.2, P = .669), sex (69.4% female vs 70.8%, P = .656), and body mass index (25.7 ± 4.0 vs 25.5 ± 3.7, P = .849). The revision group showed a greater prevalence of prolonged preoperative pain (50.0% vs 27.8%, P = .032) compared with the primary group. A significant improvement in all PROs was observed for both groups with comparable PROs preoperatively and at the 5-year follow-up between groups (P ≥ .086). The revision and primary groups showed comparable minimal clinically important difference (95.0% vs 95.7%, P ≥ .999), patient acceptable symptom state (80.0% vs 83.6%, P = .757), and substantial clinical benefit (62.5% vs 70.7%, P = .603) achievement for any PRO. Comparable reoperation-free survivorship was observed (P = .151).

CONCLUSIONS

Propensity-matched patients with BHD undergoing primary and revision hip arthroscopy for FAIS achieved similar minimum 5-year PROs, clinically significant outcomes, and reoperation-free survivorship.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

Postoperative Strength Differences at Short-Term Follow-Up Vary Based on Autograft Harvest Site After Adolescent Transphyseal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of adolescent patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with quadriceps tendon (QT) versus hamstring tendon (HT) autograft.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adolescent patients aged 18 years or younger treated at a single tertiary care children's hospital who underwent primary transphyseal ACLR using QT or HT between January 2018 and December 2019. All patients had minimum 6-month follow-up. Outcomes included isokinetic strength testing, postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and International Knee Documentation Committee scores, and complications; these were compared between the QT and HT cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients (44 HT and 40 QT patients) were included. The QT cohort had a higher proportion of male patients (62.5% vs 34.1%, P = .01). At 3 months, HT patients had a lower hamstring-quadriceps (H/Q) strength ratio (60.7 ± 11.0 vs 79.5 ± 18.6, P < .01) and lower Limb Symmetry Index in flexion (85.6 ± 16.1 vs 95.5 ± 15.7, P = .01) whereas QT patients had a lower Limb Symmetry Index in extension (67.3 ± 9.5 vs 77.4 ± 10.7, P < .01). The H/Q ratio at 6 months was lower in HT patients (59.4 ± 11.5 vs 66.2 ± 7.5, P < .01). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were not different at 3 months or latest follow-up. QT patients had more wound issues (20.0% vs 2.3%, P = .01). Patients receiving HT autograft had more ipsilateral knee injuries (18.2% vs 2.5%, P = .03), but there was no difference in graft failure for ACLR using HT versus QT (9.1% vs 2.5%, P = .36).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures between patients receiving QT autografts and those receiving HT autografts. Patients with QT grafts had more postoperative wound issues but a lower rate of ipsilateral knee complications (graft failure or meniscal tear). Differences in quadriceps and hamstring strength postoperatively compared with the contralateral limb were observed for adolescent ACLR patients receiving QT and HT autografts, respectively. This contributed to higher H/Q ratios seen at 3 and 6 months postoperatively for patients receiving QT autografts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic study.

Hip Arthroscopy Patients With Lower Back Pain Show Delayed Clinical Improvement and Inferior Time-Dependent Survivorship: A Propensity Matched Study at Mid-Term Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and survivorship at mid-term follow-up after hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in patients with and without preoperative lower back pain (LBP).

METHODS

Patients with self-endorsed preoperative LBP who underwent HA for FAIS with mid-term follow-up were identified and propensity matched 1:1 to patients without back pain by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). PROs collected preoperatively and at postoperative years 1, 2, and 5 included Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain. Achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were compared. Survivorship was compared with Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 119 patients with LBP were matched to 119 patients without LBP. Group demographic factors were as follows: age (37.4 ± 11.9 vs 37.6 ± 12.6 years, P = .880), sex (64.4% vs 67.7% female, P = .796), and BMI (25.3 ± 5.1 vs 25.3 ± 5.4, P = .930). Average follow-up duration was 6.0 ± 1.9 years. LBP patients showed similar preoperative PROs, yet lower 1-year scores for all PROs (P ≤ .044). At final follow-up, similar PROs were shown between groups (P ≥ .196). LBP and non-LBP patients had similar MCID achievement for HOS-ADL (59.3% vs 63.1%, P = .640), HOS-SS (73.9% vs 70.8%, P = .710), mHHS (66.7% vs 73.4%, P = .544), iHOT-12 (85.1% vs 79.4%, P = .500), and VAS Pain (75.6% vs 69.9%, P = .490). Groups also had similar PASS achievement for HOS-ADL (63.5% vs 61.3%, P = .777), HOS-SS (57.0% vs 62.5%, P = .461), mHHS (81.9% vs 79.1%, P = .692), iHOT-12 (54.6% vs 61.2%, P = .570), and VAS Pain (51.0% vs 55.4%, P = .570). Additionally, achievement of MCID ≥ 1 PRO (P ≥ .490) and PASS ≥ 1 PRO (P ≥ .370) was similar across groups. Conversion to total hip arthroplasty occurred in 3.4% of hips with LBP and 0.8% of hips without LBP (P = .370). Back pain patients demonstrated inferior time-dependent survivorship compared with patients without back pain on Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (P = .023).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS with LBP achieve comparable PROs and clinically significant outcomes to patients without back pain at mid-term, despite lower 1-year PRO scores. LBP patients show inferior reoperation-free time-dependent survivorship compared with those without LBP.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

Gluteus Repair Yields Satisfactory Clinically Significant Outcome Achievement by 1 Year in Mostly Partial-Thickness Tears With Preoperative Hip Abduction Weakness Associated With Delayed Achievement

PURPOSE

To define the time to achievement of clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) after primary gluteus medius and/or minimus (GM) repair and to identify factors associated with delayed CSO achievement.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary GM repair between January 2012 and June 2021 with complete preoperative, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) were retrospectively identified. Cohort-specific minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) were calculated. The time to achievement of MCID and PASS was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Median time to MCID and PASS achievement was recorded. Multivariate stepwise Cox regressions were used to identify factors associated with delayed CSO achievement.

RESULTS

Fifty GM repairs were identified (age 59.4 ± 9.7 years, body mass index 27.9 ± 6.2, 94% female). Tears were grade 1 in 39 cases, grade 2 in 7 cases, and grade 3 in 4 cases. Endoscopic repair was performed in 35 cases, and open repair was performed in 15 cases. Labral debridement and repair were each performed in 15 cases. Median time to CSO achievement was 5.7 months for MCID and 11.0 months for PASS. The 2-year cumulative probability of MCID and PASS achievement was 92.7% and 66.7%, respectively. Preoperative hip abduction weakness on physical examination was associated with delayed achievement of MCID (hazard ratio 2.27, confidence interval 1.067-7.41, P = .039) and PASS (hazard ratio 3.89, confidence interval 1.341-11.283, P = .012).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that in patients undergoing repair of primarily grade 1 GM tears, most achieved MCID by 6 months, and more than one half achieved PASS by 12 months. Preoperative hip abduction weakness on physical examination was associated with delayed CSO achievement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

The Promising 2-Year Performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System in Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds have been previously defined for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) at 1-year follow-up in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome; however, the MCID and PASS thresholds are yet to be defined for the PROMIS at 2-year follow-up.

PURPOSE

(1) To establish MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI) and PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) at 2-year follow-up and (2) to correlate PROMIS scores with hip-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores.

STUDY DESIGN

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

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome between August and November 2020 with preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative data were identified. Collected scores included those for the PROMIS-PI, PROMIS-PF, Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. MCID thresholds were calculated using the distribution-based method and PASS thresholds using the anchor-based method. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to compare scores between PROMs.

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients met the criteria for inclusion (72.3% female; mean age, 36.9 ± 13.5 years; mean body mass index, 26.2 ± 6.0). The mean follow-up was 25.3 ± 3.3 months. Significant preoperative to postoperative improvements were observed for all PROMs (P < .001). MCID thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 10.1 and 75%, respectively; HOS-SS, 13.8 and 79%, respectively; iHOT-12, 14.0 and 67%, respectively; VAS pain, -13.8 and 78%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, -4.7 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 5.8 and 60%, respectively. PASS thresholds and achievement rates were as follows: HOS-ADL, 78.7 and 67%, respectively; HOS-SS, 76.4 and 62%, respectively; iHOT-12, 67.4 and 60%, respectively; VAS pain, 25.5 and 61%, respectively; PROMIS-PI, 57.0 and 65%, respectively; and PROMIS-PF, 45.6 and 58%, respectively. PROMIS-PI scores correlated most strongly with HOS-ADL (r = -0.836), HOS-SS (r = -0.767), and iHOT-12 (r = -0.719) scores and exhibited at least moderate correlations (r≥-0.595) with the other PROM scores. PROMIS-PF demonstrated moderate correlations with all the other PROM scores (r≥-0.586). Strong correlations were seen between the hip-specific PROM scores (r≥-0.745).

CONCLUSION

This study defined 2-year MCID and PASS thresholds for the PROMIS-PI and PROMIS-PF and demonstrated moderate to strong correlations between PROMIS scores and hip-specific PROM scores.

Social Determinants of Health in Maryland Hip Arthroscopy Patients

Background Prior studies have demonstrated racial and socioeconomic disparities in patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) completion rates, and improvement exists across multiple orthopedic conditions. The purpose of this study was to assess whether these disparities are present in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (HA) procedures. Methods A retrospective study of 306 patients undergoing HA from 2021 to 2023 was performed. Social determinants of health (SDOH) were compared between HA patients and the general Maryland population. Patients were then classified by whether they completed baseline and six-month PROMs (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) instrument). Patients who completed PROMIS-PF were classified by whether or not they achieved minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at six months. Demographics and SDOH were compared using univariate analyses between patients who did and did not complete PROMs and between those who did and did not achieve MCID. SDOH were evaluated at the zip-code level using regional health information exchange measures. Results Compared to the Maryland population, HA patients resided in areas of lower social vulnerability. Preoperative and six-month PROMs were completed by 102 (33%) patients. No significant differences in demographics or any SDOH were found between patients who did and did not complete PROMs. Six-month MCID was achieved in 75 of 102 (74%) patients with complete PROMs; no significant differences in demographics or SDOH were observed between patients who did and did not achieve MCID. Conclusions For patients undergoing HA, disparities in patient-reported outcome completion rates and postoperative functional improvement do not appear to be present across demographics and SDOH, indicating equitable care is being delivered.

Patient Outcomes Are Not Improved by Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection Onto the Capsule at the Time of Closure During Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

Purpose

To determine the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection onto the capsule at time of closure on outcomes of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

Methods

Patients who underwent hip arthroscopy between January 2014 and December 2021 were retrospectively identified. The first cohort included patients who received PRP injection onto the capsule following capsular closure at the conclusion of the case. The second cohort did not receive PRP. Pain scores on a visual analog scale, Modified Harris Hip Scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), as well as Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function scores were obtained preoperatively as well as at multiple time points postoperatively up to 2 years.

Results

In total, 345 patients were included in the study, with 293 in the PRP cohort and 52 in the non-PRP cohort. There was no significance difference in age (P = .69), sex, or preoperative pain (P = .92) and patient-reported outcome scores between the 2 groups (modified Harris Hip Score, P = .38; Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function, P = .48), except for preoperative SANE scores, which had a greater baseline in the PRP group (P < .001). Using both observed data as well as repeated measure analysis of variance model to estimate for missing data after baseline, we found there were no differences in visual analog scale pain scores nor patient-reported outcome scores at any time point. There was similarly no difference in change from baseline for SANE scores. There was no difference in rate of revision surgery between the 2 cohorts (P = .66).

Conclusions

Based on the results of this study, intraoperative PRP injection onto the capsule at the time of capsular closure does not improve outcomes of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Pearls and pitfalls of PROMIS clinically significant outcomes in orthopaedic surgery

INTRODUCTION

Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was developed as a uniform and generalizable PROM system using item response theory and computer adaptive testing. We aimed to assess the utilization of PROMIS for clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) measurements and provide insights into its use in orthopaedic research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed PROMIS CSO reports for orthopaedic procedures via PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science from inception to 2022, excluding abstracts and missing measurements. Bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and questionnaire compliance. PROMIS domains, CSO measures, and study populations were described. A meta-analysis compared distribution and anchor-based MCIDs in low-bias (NOS ≥ 7) studies.

RESULTS

Overall, 54 publications from 2016 to 2022 were reviewed. PROMIS CSO studies were observational with increasing publication rates. Evidence-level was II in 10/54, bias low in 51/54, and compliance ≥ 86% in 46/54. Most (28/54) analysed lower extremity procedures. PROMIS domains examined Pain Function (PF) in 44/54, Pain Interference (PI) in 36/54, and Depression (D) in 18/54. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was reported in 51/54 and calculated based on distribution in 39/51 and anchor in 29/51. Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and minimal detectable change (MDC) were reported in ≤ 10/54. MCIDs were not significantly greater than MDCs. Anchor-based MCIDs were greater than distribution based MCIDs (standardized mean difference = 0.44, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS CSOs are increasingly utilized, especially for lower extremity procedures assessing the PF, PI, and D domains using distribution-based MCID. Using more conservative anchor-based MCIDs and reporting MDCs may strengthen results. Researchers should consider unique pearls and pitfalls when assessing PROMIS CSOs.

Comparison of the PROMIS and iHOT-12 in Determining Satisfaction Levels After Hip Arthroscopy for FAIS

Background

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has not been fully evaluated for outcomes assessment after hip arthroscopy to correct femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS).

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) subscales with the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) to define patients with 3 unique substantial clinical benefit (SCB) scores-patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1 year after hip arthroscopy for FAIS. We hypothesized that the iHOT-12 would be more accurate than the PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales in identifying these 3 patient groups.

Study Design

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

Methods

We reviewed the records of patients who underwent hip arthroscopy for symptomatic FAIS at 3 centers from January 2019 through June 2021 and had 1-year clinical and radiographic follow-up data. Patients completed the iHOT-12, PROMIS-PF, and PROMIS-PI on initial assessment and at 1 year (±30 days) postoperatively. Postoperative satisfaction was reported on an 11-category scale with anchors defined as "0% satisfied" and "100% satisfied." Receiver operator characteristic analysis was performed to determine the absolute SCB values for the iHOT-12 and PROMIS subscales that would most accurately identify those patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction. Area under the curve (AUC) values and 95% CIs for the 3 instruments were compared.

Results

Included were 163 patients (111 [68%] women and 52 [32%] men), with a mean age of 26.1 years. Corresponding absolute SCB scores for patients who reported ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction were as follows: iHOT-12, 68.4, 72.1, 74.7; PROMIS-PF, 45, 47.7, 49.9; and PROMIS-PI, 55.9, 52.4, 51.9. The AUC ranged between 0.67 and 0.82, with overlapping 95% CIs indicating a minimal difference in accuracy between the 3 instruments. Sensitivity and specificity values ranged between 0.61 and 0.82.

Conclusion

The PROMIS-PF and PROMIS-PI subscales were as accurate as the iHOT-12 in defining absolute SCB scores for patients reporting ≥80%, ≥90%, and 100% satisfaction at 1-year follow-up after hip arthroscopy for FAIS.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Is Not as Responsive as Legacy Scores in Detecting Patient Outcomes in Hip Preservation: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To evaluate publication trends of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in hip preservation literature, assess the usage of PROMIS as an outcome measure, and evaluate correlations of all available published PROMIS domains with legacy patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

The PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases were queried for articles evaluating PROMIS scores among hip preservation populations. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies with Level IV evidence or above (per the Sackett et al. levels of evidence), such as case series and cohort studies, reporting on perioperative use of hip PROMIS scores. Exclusion criteria consisted of arthroplasty and trauma studies. Patient demographics, PROMIS usage, and PROMIS Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficients to historic PROs were recorded for each study.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles published between 2017 and 2021 were included in the analysis, with the majority (75%) published between 2020 and 2021. Studies assessing postoperative outcomes had follow-up periods ranging from 6 months to 5 years. The most common PROMIS domain reported was Physical Function (PF), and there was varying usage of other domains including Pain Intensity, Anxiety, and Depression. PROMIS validity was most often assessed in comparison to the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) by calculating the Pearson coefficient, which assumes normal data distribution, or Spearman coefficient, which is rank-based and does not require normal data distribution. Studies comparing PROMIS-PF with mHHS reported Pearson coefficients ranging from 0.49 to 0.72 and Spearman coefficients ranging from 0.67 to 0.71.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been a chronologic increase in PROMIS usage in hip preservation literature. PROMIS demonstrates moderate-to-strong correlations with legacy PROs, but there is substantial heterogeneity in follow-up periods, PROMIS domains used, and statistical methodology. The current data show that PROMIS is not as responsive as historically used, validated PROs in quantitatively assessing function and pain in hip preservation patients.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Surgeons using PROMIS solely should be aware that the score may not be as responsive as legacy PROs in closely assessing improvements or deterioration in patient performance after hip preservation surgery. Rather than being used alone, PROMIS may be useful as a replacement for a group of legacy PROs. Thus, when used alongside select legacy PROs, overall questionnaire burden can be reduced while maintaining a high level of accuracy in assessing health status.

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.

The Current Utilization of Patient-reported Outcome Measurement Information System in Shoulder, Elbow, and Sports Medicine

Clinical research using patient-reported outcome measures has been critical within the field of shoulder, elbow, and sports medicine in helping clinicians deliver evidence-based and value-based medicine. Recently, however, clinicians have advocated for improving the process of obtaining clinically meaningful information from patients while decreasing survey fatigue and increasing compliance. To that end, the National Institutes of Health created the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System (PROMIS) in which a number of institutions and research investigations have adopted for reporting outcomes. A special focus has also been placed on PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing forms, which tailor questioning through item response theory. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into the utilization, advantages, and disadvantages of PROMIS within the field of shoulder, elbow, and sports medicine and provide a comparison with legacy patient-reported outcome measure measurements.