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

Equitable Integration of Patient-Reported Outcomes Into Clinical Practice-Opportunities, Challenges, and a Roadmap for Implementation

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a standardized assessment from the patient about their own health status. Although originally developed as research tools, PROMs can be used in clinical care to complement objective functional measures (eg, range of motion) and are increasingly integrated to guide treatment decisions and predict outcomes. In some situations, when PROMs are used during clinical care they can improve patient mortality, outcomes, engagement, well-being, and patient-physician communication. Guidance on how PROMs should be communicated with patients continued to be developed. However, PROM use may have unintended consequences, such as when used implemented without accounting for confounding factors (eg, psychological and social health) or in perpetuating healthcare disparities when used imprecisely (eg, lack of linguistic or cultural validation). In this review, we describe the current state of PROM use in orthopaedic surgery, highlight opportunities and challenges of PROM use in clinical care, and provide a roadmap to support orthopaedic surgery practices in incorporating PROMs into routine care to equitably improve patient health.

Evaluating a web-based personalized decision report for total knee or hip replacement: Lessons learned from patients

RATIONALE

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in the context of clinical care, but evaluation of patients' perspectives of PRO-based applications in routine care remains limited.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This paper investigates patients' acceptability of a personalized web-based decision report for total knee or hip replacement and identifies opportunities to refine the report.

METHOD

This qualitative evaluation was embedded in a pragmatic cluster randomized trial of the report. We interviewed 25 patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis about their experiences using the personalized decision report in the context of a surgical consultation. The web-based report contained current descriptive PRO scores of pain, function and general physical health; tailored predicted postoperative PRO scores (i.e., personalized likely outcomes based on actual knee or hip replacement outcomes of similar patients in a national registry); and information about alternative nonoperative treatments. Two trained researchers analysed the interview data qualitatively using a combination of inductive and deductive coding.

RESULTS

We identified three major categories for evaluation: content of report, presentation of data in report and engagement with report. Patients generally liked the report overall but specifically valued different pages of the report based on where they were in the surgical decision-making process. Patients identified areas of confusion in data presentation related to graph orientation, terminology and interpretation of T-scores. Patients also highlighted support needs to meaningfully engage with the information in the report.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight areas of opportunity to further refine this personalized web-based decision report and similar patient-facing PRO applications for routine clinical care. Specific examples include additional tailoring of reports via filterable web-based dashboards and scalable educational supports to facilitate more independent patient understanding and use.

Collaborative Ambulatory Orthopaedic Care in Patients with Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study on Health Utilisation and Economic Outcomes

Objective

To evaluate a novel healthcare programme for the treatment of patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis in southern Germany in terms of clinical and health economic outcomes. The study is based on claims data from 2014 to 2017.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective comparative cohort study of 9768 patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis, of whom 9231 were enrolled in a collaborative ambulatory orthopaedic care programme (intervention group), and 537 patients received usual orthopaedic care (control group). Key features of the programme are coordinated care, morbidity-adapted reimbursement and extended consultation times. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine effects on health utilisation outcomes. The economic analysis considered annual costs per patient from a healthcare payer perspective, stratified by healthcare service sector. Besides multivariable regression analyses, bootstrapping was used to estimate confidence intervals for predicted mean costs by group.

Results

Musculoskeletal-disease-related hospitalisation was much less likely among intervention group patients than control group patients [odds ratio (OR): 0.079; 95% CI: 0.062-0.099]. The number of physiotherapy prescriptions per patient was significantly lower in the intervention group (RR: 0.814; 95% CI: 0.721-0.919), while the likelihood of participation in exercise programmes over one year was significantly higher (OR: 3.126; 95% CI: 1.604-6.094). Enrolment in the programme was associated with significantly higher ambulatory costs (€1048 vs. €925), but costs for inpatient care, including hospital stays, were significantly lower (€1003 vs. €1497 and €928 vs. €1300 respectively). Overall annual cost-savings were €195 per patient.

Conclusions

Collaborative ambulatory orthopaedic care was associated with reduced hospitalisation in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Health costs for programme participants were lower overall, despite higher costs for ambulatory care.

Digital health in musculoskeletal care: where are we heading?

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders launched a Collection on digital health to get a sense of where the wind is blowing, and what impact these technologies are and will have on musculoskeletal medicine. This editorial summarizes findings and focuses on some key topics, which are valuable as digital health establishes itself in patient care. Elements discussed are digital tools for the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases, coupled together with advances in methodologies to analyse health records and imaging. Moreover, the acceptability and validity of these digital advances is discussed. In sum, this editorial and the papers presented in this article collection on Digital health in musculoskeletal care will give the interested reader both a glance towards which future we are heading, and which new challenges these advances bring.

Equity-Driven Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Musculoskeletal Care: Advancing Value for All

ABSTRACT

The clinical use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in musculoskeletal care is expanding, encompassing both individual patient management and population-level applications. However, without thoughtful implementation, we risk introducing or exacerbating disparities in care processes or outcomes. We outline examples of opportunities, challenges, and priorities throughout PROM implementation to equitably advance value-based care at both the patient and population level. Balancing standardization with tailored strategies can enable the large-scale implementation of PROMs while optimizing care processes and outcomes for all patients.