Decisions and Incisions: A Value-Driven Practice Framework for Academic Surgeons

The Association of Preoperative Hip Pain Duration With Delayed Achievement of Clinically Significant Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopic Surgery for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Patients with hip pain ≥2 years before hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) have been shown to achieve inferior short-term and midterm outcomes compared with patients with a shorter pain duration, although there is limited literature that has evaluated the time to achieve clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) in this population.

PURPOSE

To compare the time to achieve CSOs after hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS in patients with and without prolonged hip pain and to identify independent predictors of the delayed achievement of CSOs.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS between January 2012 and July 2019 with 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS) scores were identified. Patients with prolonged hip pain (preoperative duration ≥2 years) were propensity score matched to a control group (preoperative duration <2 years), controlling for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). The times to achieve the minimal clinically important difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State were compared between groups using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Multivariate Cox regression considering age, sex, BMI, pain duration, activity level, and chondral status was used to identify independent predictors of the delayed achievement of CSOs.

RESULTS

A total of 179 patients with prolonged hip pain were matched to 179 control patients (mean pain duration, 60.5 ± 51.2 vs 9.7 ± 5.1 months, respectively; P < .001) of a similar age, sex, and BMI (P≥ .488) with similar baseline HOS-ADL and HOS-SS scores (P≥ .971). The prolonged hip pain group showed delayed achievement of the minimal clinically important difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State for both the HOS-ADL and HOS-SS on Kaplan-Meier analysis (P≤ .020). On multivariate Cox regression, hip pain duration ≥2 years was shown to be an independent predictor of the delayed achievement of CSOs, with hazard ratios ranging from 1.32 to 1.65 (P≤ .029). Additional independent predictors of the delayed achievement of CSOs included increasing age, increasing BMI, female sex, self-endorsed weekly participation in physical activity, and high-grade chondral defects (hazard ratio range, 1.01-4.89; P≤ .045).

CONCLUSION

Findings from this study demonstrate that preoperative hip pain duration ≥2 years was an independent predictor of the delayed achievement of CSOs after primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS.

Primary Hip Arthroscopy Is Associated With Earlier Achievement of Substantial Clinical Benefit Compared With Revision Hip Arthroscopy for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome

PURPOSE

To compare time to achievement of clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) between patients undergoing primary and revision hip arthroscopy (HA) for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary and revision HA for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome with complete 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and Sport Subscale (HOS-SSS) were identified. Revision patients were propensity matched 1:4 to primary patients with HA, controlling for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). Time to achievement of minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) were compared alongside cumulative CSO achievement at 6, 12, and 24 months. Hazard ratios (HRs) for predictors of earlier CSO achievement were identified with multivariate Cox regressions.

RESULTS

Fifty patients with revision HA were propensity-matched to 200 patients with primary HA of similar age, sex, and BMI. Patients with primary HA demonstrated a greater prevalence of regular preoperative physical activity (87% vs 59%, P < .001). Patients with primary HA showed significantly greater SCB achievement for HOS-ADL at 6, 12, and 24 months (P < .001) and significantly greater SCB achievement for HOS-SSS at 12 and 24 months (P ≤ .001) compared with patients with revision HA. Patients with primary HA achieved SCB for HOS-ADL (P < .001) and HOS-SSS (P = .015) quicker than patients with revision HA. Predictors of earlier CSO achievement included preoperative PRO score (HR 0.98-1.02, P ≤ 0.007), lower BMI (HR 0.97, P = .038), presence of physical activity (HR 1.51, P = .038), and absence of revision status (HR 0.52-0.56, P ≤ .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with primary HA showed a quicker time to SCB achievement for HOS-ADL and HOS-SSS compared with patients with revision HA. Preoperative PRO score, lower BMI, regular physical activity, and primary HA status predicted earlier CSO achievement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative series.

Lateral Locking Plate Fixation of Simple Weber B Fibula Fractures Without a Lag Screw Yields Excellent Radiographic Results

BACKGROUND

The most common first-line fixation technique for simple Weber B fibula fractures is a lag screw with lateral neutralization plate. The most common surgical technique for unstable Weber B fibula fracture is one-third semi-tubular plate and cortical screws, implemented with lag screw when appropriate. However, the lag technique can be technically challenging in osteoporotic bone or within fibulas of smaller diameter, and in some cases can result in fragmentation at the fracture site, malreduction, or peroneal irritation. The purpose of this study is to examine an alternative first-line method for routine treatment of simple Weber B fibula fractures.

METHODS

Fifty-two consecutive patients undergoing open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of a Weber B fibula fracture by a single surgeon were included in this retrospective study. After reduction, a lateral locking plate was applied with cortical screws proximally and locking screws distally. No screw crossed the fracture in any case. Per published precedent, nonunion was defined as either a gap of >3 mm between fracture surfaces >6 months postoperatively or a fracture line >2 to 3 mm wide and sclerosing of the fracture surfaces. Similarly, malunion was defined as one or more of the following: talar tilt >2º, talar subluxation >2 mm, or tibiofibular clear space ≥5 mm.

RESULTS

The mean (± standard deviation) age of the 52 included patients was 44.2 ± 16.2 years, the mean body mass index was 27.7 ± 6.6 kg/m2, and 63.5% of patients identified themselves as female sex. The mean follow-up was 6.2 (range: 1.5-15) months. In addition to undergoing fixation of the lateral malleolus, 21 patients also underwent fixation of the posterior malleolus, 27 underwent fixation of the medial malleolus, 29 underwent fixation across the syndesmosis, and 7 underwent repair of the deltoid. In all patients, bony anatomic union of the fibula and congruence of the mortise were achieved with no cases of malunion or nonunion.

CONCLUSIONS

The Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) fixation technique for simple Weber B fractures with a lag screw and lateral neutralization plating has provided good outcomes for decades. We present an alternative technique for ORIF of these fractures with a lateral locking plate and no lag screw. In our series, we evaluated radiographic union and alignment as our primary outcome measures and found no cases of nonunion or malunion. Prospective cohort testing of lateral locking plates versus traditional fixation in the context of patient-centered value is warranted.Level of Evidence: Level III.

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.

Time required to achieve clinically significant outcomes after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction

PURPOSE

To investigate the time-dependent nature of clinically significant outcomes, including the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction, and the factors contributing to the achievement of early clinically significant outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ASCR between March 2015 and September 2020 with complete preoperative and postoperative 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were retrospectively analysed. Threshold values for MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS were obtained from the previous literature for the PROMs. The time required to achieve clinically significant outcomes was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to evaluate the variables predictive of an earlier or delayed achievement of MCID.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients with a mean age of 64.5 ± 8.7 years old were included. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for VAS was 11.2 ± 0.9, 16.3 ± 1.1, and 16.6 ± 0.9 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for ASES was 13.2 ± 1.0, 16.8 ± 1.0, and 18.3 ± 0.9 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for the Constant score was 11.6 ± 0.9, 15.1 ± 1.0, and 14.7 ± 0.9 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, substantial clinical benefit, and PASS for SANE was 14.4 ± 1.0, 16.1 ± 1.0, and 15.5 ± 0.8 months, respectively. Patients with a higher preoperative VAS score achieved an earlier MCID for VAS (P = 0.014). However, patients with a higher preoperative ASES and SANE scores achieved delayed MCID for ASES and SANE (P = 0.026, and P < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Most patients achieved MCIDs around 1 year after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction. A higher preoperative VAS score favours faster MCID achievement, while higher preoperative ASES and SANE scores contribute to delayed MCID achievement.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Determining the Time Required to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes on the PROMIS Upper Extremity Questionnaire After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

Background

Clinically significant outcome (CSO) thresholds for the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System-Upper Extremity (PROMIS-UE) score have been previously defined after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR). However, the time required to achieve CSOs for the PROMIS-UE score is unknown.

Purpose

To (1) determine the time required to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) score thresholds after RCR for the PROMIS-UE questionnaire and (2) identify patient factors associated with earlier or delayed achievement of these clinical benchmarks.

Study Design

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A prospectively maintained institutional database was retrospectively reviewed for consecutive patients who underwent RCR between January 2018 and January 2019. Patients were included if they completed the PROMIS-UE questionnaire both preoperatively and at standardized postoperative time intervals: 5 to 7 months (6-month time point), 11 to 13 months (1-year time point), and ≥23 months (2-year time point). Kaplan-Meier survival curves with interval censoring were used to define the cumulative percentage of patients who achieved the MCID, SCB, and PASS. Patient variables associated with earlier or delayed achievement of the MCID, SCB, and PASS were determined using Weibull parametric survival regression analysis.

Results

Included were 105 patients undergoing RCR (age, 57.3 ± 10.3 years; body mass index, 31.5 ± 6.1 kg/m²). By 2-year follow-up, the cumulative percentage of patients achieving the MCID, SCB, and PASS was 86.7%, 76.2%, and 74.3%, respectively. The mean time required to reach the MCID, SCB, and PASS score thresholds was 9.5 ± 3.8, 10.3 ± 4.4, and 9.8 ± 4.6 months, respectively. Factors associated with delayed achievement of CSOs included greater baseline PROMIS-UE score (MCID and SCB) and workers' compensation insurance (PASS). Greater baseline PROMIS-UE scores were associated with earlier achievement of the PASS.

Conclusion

Most patients achieved CSOs for the PROMIS-UE within 12 months of RCR. Patient-specific factors found to be associated with earlier or delayed achievement of CSOs can be used to inform patient discussions on the expected timeline for recovery after RCR.

How Long Does It Take to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes After Isolated Biceps Tenodesis?

Background:

Clinically significant outcomes (CSOs) connect patient-reported outcome measures data to patient-perceived benefit. Although investigators have established threshold values for various CSOs, the timeline to achieve these outcomes after isolated biceps tenodesis (BT) has yet to be defined.

Purpose:

To define the time-dependent nature of minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) achievement after isolated BT.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and the Constant-Murley score (CMS) were administered preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively to patients undergoing isolated BT between 2014 and 2018 at our institution. Cumulative probabilities for achieving MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Weibull parametric regression evaluated the hazard ratios (HRs) of achieving earlier MCID, SCB, and PASS.

Results:

Overall cohort (N = 190) achievement rates ranged between 77.8% and 83.2% for MCID, between 42.2% and 80.2% for SCB, and between 59.7% and 62.9% for PASS. Median achievement time was 5.3 to 6.1 months for MCID, 5.9 to 6.4 months for SCB, and 6.07 to 6.1 months for PASS. Multivariate Weibull parametric regression identified older age, male sex, higher body mass index, preoperative thyroid disease, smoking history, and higher preoperative CMS as predictors of delayed CSO achievement (HR, 1.01-6.41), whereas normal tendon on arthroscopy, defined as absence of tenosynovitis or tendon tear on arthroscopy, predicted earlier CSO achievement (HR, 0.19-0.46). Location of tenodesis and worker compensation status did not significantly predict the time to achieve CSOs on multivariate analysis.

Conclusion:

After isolated BT, patients can expect to attain CSO by 13 months postoperatively, with most patients achieving this between 5 and 8 months. Patients tend to take longer to achieve PASS than MCID and SCB.

The Minimally Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Time-to-Achievement Analysis

This study examined the time-dependent course of the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) and the substantial clinical benefit (SCB) achievement for International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). A prospective institutional registry was queried for patients receiving ACLR. The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of interest included the IKDC score and KOOS sub-scales. One hundred forty-three patients (mean±SD age, 30.86±12.78 years; mean±SD body mass index, 25.51±4.64 kg/m²) were included in the analysis. Threshold values for the MCID/SCB were 18.9 of 29.6 on IKDC score, 15.7 of 25.3 on KOOS Symptom, 11.9 of 15.5 on KOOS Pain, 13.3 of 20.0 on KOOS ADL, 25.9 of 35.8 on KOOS Quality of Life (QoL), and 27.0 of 43.0 on KOOS Sport (area under the curve, 0.74-0.91). Overall, MCID achievement rates increased from 28.0% to 42.7% at 6 months to 41.9% to 70.8% at 12 months. Achievement rates of SCB increased from 16.1% to 30.4% at 6 months to 29.3% to 51.8% at 12 months. Statistically significant increases in MCID achievement (chi-square=47.95-79.36, all P<.001) and SCB achievement (chi-square=26.02-53.24, all P<.001) occurred from preoperative to 6-month time points across PROMs. From 6-month to 12-month time points, increases in MCID achievement occurred on IKDC score and KOOS QoL (chi-square=5.53-15.11, P<.001-.009). Statistically significant increases in MCID and SCB achievement occurred from preoperative to 6-month time points across IKDC score and KOOS subscales; however, statistically significant increases in achievement rates from 6 months to 1 year occurred on IKDC score, KOOS QoL, and KOOS Sport. This study underlines the importance of considering psychological factors and rehabilitative milestones when examining the achievement MCID and SCB after ACLR. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(5):299-305.].

Time Required to Achieve Clinically Significant Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

BACKGROUND

Recent literature has focused on correlating statistically significant changes in outcome measures with clinically significant outcomes (CSOs). CSO benchmarks are being established for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR), but more remains to be defined about them.

PURPOSE

To define the time-dependent nature of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) after RCR and to define what factors affect this time to CSO achievement.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

An institutional registry was queried for patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR between 2014 and 2016 and completed preoperative, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Threshold values for MCID, SCB, and PASS were obtained from previous literature for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and subjective Constant score. The time in which patients achieved MCID, SCB, and PASS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. A Cox multivariate regression model was used to identify variables correlated with earlier or later achievement of CSOs.

RESULTS

A total of 203 patients with an average age of 56.19 ± 9.96 years and average body mass index was 30.29 ± 6.49 were included. The time of mean achievement of MCID, SCB, and PASS for ASES was 5.77 ± 1.79 months, 6.22 ± 2.85 months, and 7.23 ± 3.81 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, SCB, and PASS for SANE was 6.25 ± 2.42 months, 7.05 ± 4.10 months, and 9.26 ± 5.89 months, respectively. The time of mean achievement of MCID, SCB, and PASS for Constant was 6.94 ± 3.85 months, 7.13 ± 4.13 months, and 8.66 ± 5.46 months, respectively. Patients with dominant-sided surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 1.363; 95% CI, 1.065-1.745; P = .014) achieved CSOs earlier on ASES, while patients with workers' compensation status (HR, 0.752; 95% CI, 0.592-0.955; P = .019), who were current smokers (HR, 0.323; 95% CI, 0.119-0.882; P = .028), and with concomitant biceps tenodesis (HR, 0.763; 95% CI, 0.607-0.959; P = .021) achieved CSOs on ASES at later timepoints. Patients with distal clavicle excision (HR, 1.484; 95% CI, 1.028-2.143; P = .035) achieved CSOs earlier on SANE. Patients with distal clavicle excision (HR, 1.689; 95% CI, 1.183-2.411, P = .004) achieved CSOs earlier on Constant, while patients with workers' compensation insurance status (HR, 0.671; 95% CI, 0.506-0.891; P = .006) and partial-thickness tears (HR, 0.410; 95% CI, 0.250-0.671; P < .001) achieved CSOs later on Constant. Greater preoperative score was associated with delayed achievement of CSOs for ASES, SANE (HR, 0.993; 95% CI, 0.987-0.999; P = .020), and Constant (HR, 0.941; 95% CI, 0.928-0.962; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

A majority of patients achieved MCID by 6 months after surgery. Dominant-sided surgery and concomitant distal clavicle excision resulted in faster CSO achievement, while workers' compensation status, concomitant biceps tenodesis, current smoking, partial-thickness rotator cuff tears, and higher preoperative PROMs resulted in delayed CSO achievement.

Predictive Modeling to Determine Functional Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic surgical procedures; however, patient-reported outcomes have varied greatly in the literature.

PURPOSE

To identify preoperative factors that affect outcomes and to develop prognostic tools for predicting functional outcomes in future ARCR cases.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients were included who underwent ARCR for repairable full-thickness rotator cuff tears with at least 2 years of follow-up. Twelve predictors were entered as candidate predictors in each model: age, sex, workers' compensation (WC) status, previous cuff repair, tear size, tear shape, multiple-tendon involvement, tendon stump length, Goutallier classification, critical shoulder angle, length of follow-up, and baseline subjective outcomes score. Postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), QuickDASH (short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand), and patient satisfaction were each modeled through proportional odds ordinal logistic regression. Model results were presented with marginal covariate effect plots and predictive nomograms.

RESULTS

Overall, 552 shoulders fit inclusion criteria. The mean age at surgery was 60.2 years (range, 23-81 years). Twenty-five (4.5%) shoulders underwent revision cuff repair or reverse arthroplasty at a mean 1.9 years (range, 0.1-7.9 years) postoperatively. Overall, 509 shoulders were eligible for follow-up, and minimum 2-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes were obtained for 449 (88.2%) at a mean 4.8 years (range, 2-11 years). The ASES score demonstrated significant improvement from pre- to postoperative median (interquartile range): 58 (44.9-71.6) to 98.3 (89.9-100; P < .001). Women demonstrated significantly higher 2-year reoperation rates than men (5.8% vs 1.6%; odds ratio, 2.8 [95% CI, 0.73-9.6]; P = .023). Independently significant predictors for lower postoperative ASES scores included previous ARCR (P < .001), female sex (P < .001), and a WC claim (P < .001). Significant predictors for worse QuickDASH scores included WC claim (P < .001), female sex (P < .001), previous ARCR (P = .007), and ≥7 years of follow-up time. Significant predictors for lower SF-12 PCS scores included WC claim (P < .001), female sex (P = .001), and lower baseline SF-12 PCS. Last, significant independent predictors of patient satisfaction included previous ARCR (P = .004), WC claim (P = .011), female sex (P = .041), and age (P = .041).

CONCLUSION

Excellent clinical outcomes and low failure rates were obtained after ARCR by using careful patient selection and modern surgical techniques for ARCR. Female sex, WC claim, and previous ARCR were significant predictors of poorer outcomes in at least 3 patient-reported outcome models. Prognostic nomograms were developed to aid in future patient selection, clinical decision making, and patient education.

Applying a value-based care framework to post-mastectomy reconstruction

PURPOSE

Reconstructive breast surgeons, like all procedural care providers, face a transition from volume reimbursement (i.e., per unit of service) to value-based care. Value can be defined as the relationship between outcomes and costs, or more specifically healthcare outcomes per unit cost. Although the definition of a meaningful outcome for a particular treatment can vary, some weighted average of survival, function, complications, process measures, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) comprise the numerator, while the total cost of a complete care cycle is the denominator. We aim to construct a value-based care framework for reconstructive surgery using post-mastectomy reconstruction as an organizing element.

METHODS

A preexisting value framework was applied to breast reconstruction using expert opinion and literature review. Domains and associated realization strategies were constructed based on established health economic principles.

RESULTS

Seven domains were identified including: implementing an inclusive and transparent process for stakeholder engagement, practicing clear and explicit treatment goals, anchoring care delivery to the patient perspective, maximizing value across the entire continuum of care, optimizing operation efficiency, and scaling best practices with implementation science.

CONCLUSIONS

In the near future, reconstructive plastic surgeons may be asked to solve clinical problems for fixed reimbursement (i.e. bundled payments). Considering breast reconstruction through a value lens provides surgeons with an opportunity to adapt and thrive in an evolving healthcare landscape. Lastly, we hope this document helps promote value assessment within the specialty.

Contingent Valuation Studies in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Health Economic Review

BACKGROUND

A greater emphasis on providing high-value orthopaedic interventions has resulted in increased health economic reporting. The contingent-valuation method (CVM) is used to determine consumer valuation of the benefits provided by healthcare interventions. CVM is an important value-based health economic tool that is underutilized in orthopaedic surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this study was to (1) identify previously published CVM studies in the orthopaedic literature, (2) assess the methodologies used for CVM research, and (3) understand how CVM has been used in the orthopaedic cost-benefit analysis framework.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE database was performed to compile CVM studies. Search terms incorporated the phrase willingness to pay (WTP) or willingness to accept (WTA) in combination with orthopaedic clinical key terms. Study methodology was appraised using previously defined empirical and conceptual criteria for CVM studies.

RESULTS

Of the 160 studies retrieved, 22 (13.8%) met our inclusion criteria. The economics of joint arthroplasty (n = 6, 27.3%) and non-operative osteoarthritis care (n = 4, 18.2%) were the most common topics. Most studies used CVM for pricing and/or demand forecasting (n = 16, 72.7%); very few studies used CVM for program evaluation (n = 6). WTP was used in all included studies, and one study used both WTP and WTA. Otherwise, there was little consistency among included studies in terms of CVM methodology. Open-ended questioning was used by only ten studies (45.5%), a significant number of studies did not perform a sensitivity analysis (n = 9, 40.9%), and none of the studies accounted for the risk preference of subjects. Only two of the included studies applied CVM within a cost-benefit analysis framework.

CONCLUSION

CVM is not commonly reported in orthopaedic surgery and is seldom used in the context of cost-benefit analysis. There is wide variability in the methods used to perform CVM. We propose that CVM is an appropriate and underappreciated method for understanding the value of orthopaedic interventions. Increased attention should be paid to consumer valuations for orthopaedic interventions.

Time Required to Achieve Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit After Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement

BACKGROUND

Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) defines the minimum degree of quantifiable outcome improvement that a patient perceives as the result of an intervention or in the process of healing. Substantial clinical benefit (SCB) defines the amount of quantifiable outcome improvement that is needed for a patient to feel substantially better. Little is known about when clinically significant outcome improvement is achieved.

PURPOSE

To investigate the time-dependent nature of MCID and SCB after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

An institutional hip preservation registry was queried. The modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score, and 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33) were administered to patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI. Follow-up times for outcome measures were classified into 3 periods: 5 to 11 months (6 months), 12 to 23 months (1 year), and 24 to 35 months (2 years). Cumulative probabilities for achieving MCID and SCB were calculated with Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis and interval censoring. A Weibull parametric regression analysis evaluated the odds of achieving earlier MCID.

RESULTS

A total of 719 patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy were included. The mean ± SD age was 32.5 ± 10.5 years, and the majority were female (n = 380, 52.9%). Across all 4 outcome instruments, patients had the highest probability for achieving MCID and SCB by the 6-month postoperative period. The iHOT-33 demonstrated the highest probability for capturing MCID and SCB improvement at each of the 3 periods, with 76.0%, 84.8%, and 93.6% achieving MCID by 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, respectively. Similarly, the probabilities of achieving SCB on the iHOT-33 were as follows: 57.1%, 68.0%, and 71.7%. A similar trend was demonstrated across other outcome tools. Older male patients and those with Outerbridge classification 1 to 4 (vs grade 0) had a significantly increased risk for taking a longer time to achieve MCID and SCB. Additionally, patients with higher preoperative outcome scores took a longer time to achieve MCID and SCB.

CONCLUSION

At least half of patients treated with hip arthroscopy for FAI achieve MCID and SCB within the first 6 months after the procedure. However, clinically significant outcome improvement continues to be attained until 2 years postoperatively. Female patients, younger individuals, and those without chondral defects achieve faster clinical outcome improvement. These findings can be helpful for establishing shared decision-making aids and follow-up guidelines for arthroscopic treatment of FAI.