Patient Preferences for Surgical Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Discrete-Choice Experiment Evaluating Total and Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty

Multidimensional Thresholding for Individual-Level Preference Elicitation

OBJECTIVES

Multiple methods are available for collecting health preference information. However, information on the design and analysis of novel methods is limited. This article aims to provide the first introduction into the design and analysis of multidimensional thresholding (MDT).

METHODS

We introduce MDT as a 2-step approach: First, participants rank the largest possible improvements in all considered attributes by their importance. Second, participants complete a series of systematically combined trade-off questions. Hit-and-Run sampling is used for obtaining preference weights. We also use a computational experiment to compare different MDT designs.

RESULTS

The outlined MDT can generate preference information suitable for specifying a multiattribute utility function at the individual level. The computational experiment demonstrates the method's ability to recover preference weights at a high level of precision. While all designs in the computation experiment perform comparably well on average, the design outlined in the paper stands out with a high level of precision even if differences in relative attribute importance are large.

CONCLUSION

MDT is suitable for preference elicitation, in particular if sample sizes are small. Future research should help improve the methods (e.g., remove the need for an initial ranking) to increase the potential reach of MDT.

What's important for recovery after a total knee replacement? A systematic review of mixed methods studies

BACKGROUND

Understanding how patients perceive and prioritise various aspects of recovery following total knee replacement, including pain, function and return to activity, will help clinicians in pre-operative consultations by ensuring they effectively address patient concerns and managing their expectations.

AIMS

The aim of this study is to identify aspects of recovery that are important to people after a total knee replacement.

METHODS

Studies were identified from Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. This mixed methods review included all original study types (quantitative, qualitative, discrete choice experiments and mixed methods design). Reviews and non-peer-reviewed publications were excluded. Studies with participants (age ≥ 18 years) who had a primary TKR for osteoarthritis were included. Studies of people with unicompartmental knee, patella-femoral or revision knee replacement were excluded. Recovery attributes were extracted from individual papers and grouped into recovery themes.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies with 8404 participants and 18 recovery themes were developed. The most frequently identified overarching theme was pain, followed by activities of daily living, mobility (walking), recreational activities, specific functional movements of the knee, use of walking aids, sexual activity and range of motion of the knee. Medical complications were an infrequently reported theme, however, was deemed to be high importance.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing pain, returning of activities and daily living and mobility are the three most frequently reported recovery domains for people after TKR. Clinicians should be aware of recovery themes, to ensure they are explored sufficiently when consenting for a TKR. Future research should aim to determine the relative importance of these attributes compared to each other. Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021253699.

Factors Important to Patients when Making Treatment Decisions for Knee Osteoarthritis

Patient treatment decisions for knee osteoarthritis (OA) are driven largely by the patient's physical examination and radiograph findings. Because multiple treatment options may be medically appropriate, it is imperative that the patient's voice be considered to better facilitate patient-centered treatment decisions. Concordance between physicians and patients on optimal treatment can vary, with few studies identifying the factors important to patients when making treatment decisions for knee OA. The goal of this analysis is to identify and synthesize subjective factors in the literature found to influence patient decision-making in a presurgical knee OA population, such that physicians and health care teams can become better equipped to help patients realize their specific treatment goals. This review was registered with PROSPERO and conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol. A systematic search was completed in four databases for search terms related to knee OA and decision-making. Articles were eligible for inclusion when they discussed (1) patients' thoughts, feelings, goals, and perceptions that factored into treatment deliberation and decision-making; and (2) related to knee OA. Twenty-four articles were identified, 11 qualitative studies and 13 quantitative studies. Synthesis of the included articles revealed three main themes that drive patient treatment decisions: (1) individual catalysts to pursue treatment including pain and mobility limitations, (2) interpersonal factors including social networks and clinician trust, and (3) risks versus benefits assessment including patients' beliefs and expectations. Only a few studies looked at nonoperative treatment decisions, and no studies looked at cohorts considering knee preservation surgeries. This study was completed to synthesize literature related to patient treatment decisions for nonoperative and surgical management of knee OA, finding that patients consider multiple subjective factors when choosing whether to move forward with treatment. Understanding how patients' beliefs determine their preferences for treatment can improve shared decision-making.

Comparison of spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic gait characteristics in total and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty during level walking: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis was performed to compare the spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic gait characteristics during level walking between total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA).

METHODS

An electronic database literature search was performed to screen clinical trials which were included the studies evaluating not only spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic gait parameters, but also knee range of motion and knee score (Knee Society Score and Oxford Knee Score, i.e., KSS and OKS). The data analysis was performed using statistical software Stata 14.0 and Review Manager 5.4.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies (369 knees) that met the criteria were eventually included in this meta-analysis. The results revealed significant differences between UKA and TKA with regard to walking speed (P = 0.04), stride length (P = 0.02), maximum knee flexion at loading (P = 0.001), the 1st peak of vert-GRF (P = 0.006), the 1st valley of vert-GRF (P = 0.007), knee internal rotational moment (P = 0.04), knee extension (P < 0.00001), and KSS Function score (P = 0.05). In contrast, there were no statistical differences in the remaining spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic gait parameters.

CONCLUSION

Medial UKA design is superior to TKA design with regard to walking speed, stride length, maximum knee flexion at loading, the 1st peak and the 1st valley of vert-GRF, knee internal rotational moment, knee extension, and KSS Function score. And it could provide a stronger basis for physicians to make clinical decisions.

Which Factors Are Considered by Patients When Considering Total Joint Arthroplasty? A Discrete-choice Experiment

BACKGROUND

TKA and THA are major surgical procedures, and they are associated with the potential for serious, even life-threatening complications. Patients must weigh the risks of these complications against the benefits of surgery. However, little is known about the relative importance patients place on the potential complications of surgery compared with any potential benefit the procedures may achieve. Furthermore, patient preferences may often be discordant with surgeon preferences regarding the treatment decision-making process. A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) is a quantitative survey technique designed to elicit patient preferences by presenting patients with two or more hypothetical scenarios. Each scenario is composed of several attributes or factors, and the relative extent to which respondents prioritize these attributes can be quantified to assess preferences when making a decision, such as whether to pursue lower extremity arthroplasty.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this DCE, we asked: (1) Which patient-related factors (such as pain and functional level) and surgery-related factors (such as the risk of infection, revision, or death) are influential in patients' decisions about whether to undergo lower extremity arthroplasty? (2) Which of these factors do patients emphasize the most when making this decision?

METHODS

A DCE was designed with the following attributes: pain; physical function; return to work; and infection risks, reoperation, implant failure leading to premature revision, deep vein thrombosis, and mortality. From October 2021 to March 2022, we recruited all new patients to two arthroplasty surgeons' clinics who were older than 18 years and scheduled for a consultation for knee- or hip-related complaints who had no previous history of a primary TKA or THA. A total of 56% (292 of 517) of new patients met the inclusion criteria and were approached with the opportunity to complete the DCE. Among the cohort, 51% (150 of 292) of patients completed the DCE. Patients were administered the DCE, which consisted of 10 hypothetical scenarios that had the patient decide between a surgical and nonsurgical outcome, each consisting of varying levels of eight attributes (such as infection, reoperation, and ability to return to work). A subsequent demographic questionnaire followed this assessment. To answer our first research question about the patient-related and surgery-related factors that most influence patients' decisions to undergo lower extremity arthroplasty, we used a conditional logit regression to control for potentially confounding attributes from within the DCE and determine which variables shifted a patient's determination to pursue surgery. To answer our second question, about which of these factors received the greatest priority by patients, we compared the relevant importance of each factor, as determined by each factor's beta coefficient, against each other influential factor. A larger absolute value of beta coefficient reflects a relatively higher degree of importance placed on a variable compared with other variables within our study. Of the respondents, 57% (85 of 150) were women, and the mean age at the time of participation was 64 ± 10 years. Most respondents (95% [143 of 150]) were White. Regarding surgery, 38% (57 of 150) were considering THA, 59% (88 of 150) were considering TKA, and 3% (5 of 150) were considering both. Among the cohort, 49% (74 of 150) of patients reported their average pain level as severe, or 7 to 10 on a scale from 0 to 10, and 47% (71 of 150) reported having 50% of full physical function.

RESULTS

Variables that were influential to respondents when deciding on lower extremity total joint arthroplasty were improvement from severe pain to minimal pain (β coefficient: -0.59 [95% CI -0.72 to -0.46]; p < 0.01), improvement in physical function level from 50% to 100% (β: -0.80 [95% CI -0.9 to -0.7]; p < 0.01), ability to return to work versus inability to return (β: -0.38 [95% CI -0.48 to -0.28]; p < 0.01), and the surgery-related factor of risk of infection (β: -0.22 [95% CI -0.30 to -0.14]; p < 0.01). Improvement in physical function from 50% to 100% was the most important for patients making this decision because it had the largest absolute coefficient value of -0.80. To improve physical function from 50% to 100% and reduce pain from severe to minimal because of total joint arthroplasty, patients were willing to accept a hypothetical absolute (and not merely an incrementally increased) 37% and 27% risk of infection, respectively. When we stratified our analysis by respondents' preoperative pain levels, we identified that only patients with severe pain at the time of their appointment found the risk of infection influential in their decision-making process (β: -0.27 [95% CI -0.37 to -0.17]; p = 0.01) and were willing to accept a 24% risk of infection to improve their physical functioning from 50% to 100%.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that patients consider pain alleviation, physical function improvement, and infection risk to be the most important attributes when considering total joint arthroplasty. Patients with severe baseline pain demonstrated a willingness to take on a hypothetically high infection risk as a tradeoff for improved physical function or pain relief. Because patients seemed to prioritize postoperative physical function so highly in our study, it is especially important that surgeons customize their presentations about the likelihood an individual patient will achieve a substantial functional improvement as part of any office visit where arthroplasty is discussed. Future studies should focus on quantitatively assessing patients' understanding of surgical risks after a surgical consultation, especially in patients who may be the most risk tolerant.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Surgeons should be aware that patients with the most limited physical function and the highest baseline pain levels are more willing to accept the more potentially life-threatening and devastating risks that accompany total joint arthroplasty, specifically infection. The degree to which patients seemed to undervalue the harms of infection (based on our knowledge and perception of those harms) suggests that surgeons need to take particular care in explaining the degree to which a prosthetic joint infection can harm or kill patients who develop one.

Patient Decision Making in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Discrete Choice Experiment Examining Graft Preference

Background

Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) and hamstring autografts are the most common grafts used for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Patient preferences should be accounted for as a part of shared decision making.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to perform a discrete choice experiment that evaluated patient preferences toward ACL autografts. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in patient preferences between groups.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

Patients aged 18 to 25 years who underwent shoulder arthroscopy at a single institution between 2013 and 2019 were included in the study as a proxy for healthy controls. Patients with a history of ACL tear were excluded. A discrete choice experiment was developed from a literature search and used the following data points as they pertain to BTB or hamstring autograft: risk of developing a significant complication, return-to-play rate, risk of anterior knee pain with kneeling, and risk of additional surgery due to graft failure. Included patients completed a custom survey in which they were asked to choose between "surgery A" (hamstring) and "surgery B" (BTB).

Results

A total of 107 participants were included in the analysis. Of these participants, 39 (36.5%) chose surgery A (hamstring) and 68 (63.6%) chose surgery B (BTB). When comparing the hamstring group with the BTB group, there was no significant difference in age, sex, body mass index, race, level of education, or employment status. However, 80.5% of self-reported athletes preferred BTB (P = .008). When controlling for age, sex, and body mass index, patients in the BTB group were more likely to rate return to sport (risk ratio [RR] = 1.49 [95% CI, 1.18-1.98]; P = .001) and the risk of requiring additional surgery due to graft failure (RR = 1.26 [95% CI, 1.02-1.58]; P = .037) as highly important. Conversely, they were less likely than patients in the hamstring group to rate pain while kneeling (RR = 0.65 [95% CI, 0.98-1.05]; P < .001) and complication risk (RR = 0.75 [95% CI, 0.59-0.94]; P = .013) as important.

Conclusion

The study hypothesis was rejected, as patient values did affect ACL graft choice preference. Utilizing patient-selected values in a quantifiable way can benefit the shared decision-making process before ACL reconstruction.

Analysis of revision rates and complication rates among patients undergoing unicompartmental and bicompartmental knee Arthroplasties when compared to Total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

With recent advances in partial knee arthroplasty, there is conflicting data regarding the outcomes and revision rates for bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA) and unicompartamental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study uses national data to compare surgical and medical complications of UKA, BKA, and TKA to aid surgical decision-making.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was done using the Mariner dataset of the PearlDiver patient records database from 2010-2019. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify patients who underwent UKA, BKA, and TKA for a primary indication of osteoarthritis (OA). Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to determine 1-year and 2-year revision, prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and loosening, 1-year manipulation under anesthesia (MUA), and 90-day postoperative medical complications.

RESULTS

The BKA cohort was found to have higher odds of one and two-year revision compared to UKA and TKA cohorts. Additionally, the UKA cohort had higher odds of one and two-year revision but lower odds of 1-year MUA than the TKA cohort. However, both the BKA and UKA cohorts had lower odds of any 90-day postoperative complications when compared to the TKA cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Even with modern implants and approaches, our study found that revision rates are highest for BKA followed by UKA and TKA at two years postoperatively. Notably, medical complications were much less common after all partial knee replacement types when compared to TKA. These findings may be used to guide patients in selecting the appropriate surgery to meet their goals and expectations.

Patient and Surgeon Risk-Taking Regarding Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Decisions regarding care for osteoarthritis involve physicians helping patients understand likely benefits and harms of treatment. Little work has directly compared patient and surgeon risk-taking attitudes, which may help inform strategies for shared decision-making and improve patient satisfaction.

METHODS

We surveyed patients contemplating total joint arthroplasty visiting a high-volume specialty hospital regarding general questions about risk-taking, as well as willingness to undergo surgery under hypothetical likelihoods of moderate improvement and complications. We compared responses from surgeons answering similar questions about willingness to recommend surgery.

RESULTS

Altogether 82% (162/197) of patients responded, as did 65% (30/46) of joint replacement surgeons. Mean age among patients was 66.4 years; 58% were female. Surgeons averaged 399 surgeries in 2019. Responses were similar between groups for general, health, career, financial, and sports/leisure risk-taking (P > .20); surgeons were marginally more risk-taking in driving (P = .05). For willingness to have or recommend surgery, as the chance of benefit decreased, or the chance of harm increased, the percentage willing to have or recommend surgery decreased. Between a 70% and 95% chance of moderate improvement (for a 2% complication risk), as well as between a 90% and 95% chance of moderate improvement (for 4% and 6% complication risks), the percentage willing to have or recommend surgery was indistinguishable between patients and surgeons. However, for lower likelihoods of improvement, a higher percentage of patients were willing to undergo surgery than surgeons recommended. Patients were also more often indifferent between complication risks.

CONCLUSION

Although patients and surgeons were often willing to have or recommend joint replacement surgery at similar rates, they diverged for lower-benefit higher-harm scenarios.

The Impact of the Largest National Joint Registry on Current Knee Replacement Longevity Estimates: An Analysis and Review of Knee Prosthesis Brand and Fixation Technique

BACKGROUND

The UK National Joint Registry is the single largest joint registry in the world enrolling 1.3 million patients and recently reaching 17 years of follow-up data. Current knee prosthesis longevity estimates are based off smaller sized international registries and the impact of fixation type on prosthesis survival remains unclear.

METHODS

We used the UK National Joint Registry 17th annual report to calculate pooled mean survival estimates of total knee replacements (TKRs), unicondylar knee replacements (UKRs), and patellofemoral knee replacements at 10 and 15 years based on both construct brand and fixation technique (cemented vs uncemented). Independent t-testing was performed for significance.

RESULTS

All-cause survivorship of TKRs at 10 and 15 years is 96.7% and 95.4%, respectively. For UKRs it is 89.8% and 80.7% and for patellofemoral knee replacements it is 81.6% and 76.5%. In regard to fixation technique, cemented and uncemented TKRs show similar survivorship at both time points. For UKRs uncemented constructs showed improved survivorship compared to cemented at 10 years (92.7% vs 88.2%, P < .001). This was greatest among those <65 years of age. In fact, all construct types regardless of fixation showed increased rate of revision in those <65 years vs those ≥65 years.

CONCLUSION

We provide more accurate estimations for knee prosthesis survival and highlight that younger patients, particularly those receiving UKRs, are prone to greater revision risks. This data also suggests that uncemented fixation may offer improved joint survival in these patients.