Mental and Social Health Are Inseparable from Physical Health

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function and Global Physical Health Subscale Strongly Correlate and Perform Similarly to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form

BACKGROUND

Arthroplasty surgeons use a variety of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess functional well-being, including the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Physical Function short form (KOOS-PS), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10a (PROMIS PF SF 10a), and PROMIS Global-10 Physical Health subscale. However, there is a paucity of literature assessing their concurrent validity and performance.

METHODS

Between June 2016 and December 2020, patient visits at an arthroplasty clinic for knee concerns were identified. Patients who completed KOOS-PS, PROMIS PF SF 10a, and PROMIS Global-10, including its physical and mental health subscales, at the same visit were identified. Spearman rho (ρ) correlations were calculated and ceiling and floor effects identified. Overall, 5,303 patient encounters were included.

RESULTS

Among physical function domains, strong correlation existed between the KOOS-PS and PROMIS PF SF 10a (ρ = 0.76, P < .001), KOOS-PS and PROMIS Global Physical Health (ρ = 0.71, P < .001), and PROMIS PF SF 10a and PROMIS Global Physical Health (ρ = 0.78, P < .001). No physical function-focused PROM had an appreciable floor effect (ie, at or more than 1%). The KOOS-PS had a small but measurable ceiling effect (n = 105 [2.0%]).

CONCLUSIONS

All of the examined PROMs are acceptable to measure the functional status of patients with knee pathology, with the PROMIS Global-10 also being able to capture elements of mental health too. The PROMIS Global-10 may be of most value of the PROMs assessed, as the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services already incorporate the mental health component into new alternative payment models.

Unique characteristics of patients who choose an intensive lifestyle medicine program to address chronic musculoskeletal pain

INTRODUCTION

Factors that motivate musculoskeletal patients to pursue an intensive, lifestyle medicine-based approach to care are poorly understood.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether, compared to patients seeking musculoskeletal care through traditional pathways, patients who choose an intensive lifestyle medicine program for musculoskeletal pain endorse greater physical dysfunction, worse psychological health, and/or more biopsychosocial comorbidities.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of existing medical records from 2018 to 2021.

SETTING

Orthopedic department of one academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Fifty consecutive patients who enrolled in an intensive lifestyle medicine program to address a musculoskeletal condition. Comparison groups were the following: (1) 100 patients who presented for standard nonoperative musculoskeletal care, and (2) 100 patients who presented for operative evaluation by an orthopedic surgeon and qualified for joint arthroplasty.

INTERVENTION

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were age-adjusted, between-group differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical and psychological health measures. Secondary outcomes were between-group differences in sociodemographic and medical history characteristics.

RESULTS

Patients who enrolled in the intensive lifestyle medicine program were more racially diverse (non-White race: lifestyle cohort 34% vs. comparison cohorts 16%-18%, p ≤ .029) and had a higher prevalence of obesity and diabetes than both comparison groups (mean body mass index: lifestyle cohort 37.6 kg/m2 vs. comparison cohorts 29.3-32.0, p < .001; diabetes prevalence: lifestyle cohort 32% vs. comparison cohorts 12%-16%, p ≤ .024). Compared to standard nonoperative patients, there were no clear between-group differences in PROMIS physical or psychological health scores. Compared to standard operative evaluation patients, patients in the lifestyle program reported worse anxiety but less pain interference (PROMIS Anxiety: B = 3.8 points [95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 7.4], p = .041; Pain interference: B = -3.6 [-6.0 to -1.2], p = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to musculoskeletal patients who sought care through traditional pathways, patients who chose an intensive lifestyle medicine pathway had a higher prevalence of metabolic comorbidities, but there was substantial overlap in patients' physical, psychological, and sociodemographic characteristics.

Multi-stakeholder perspectives regarding preferred modalities for mental health intervention delivered in the orthopedic clinic: a qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Although depressive and anxious symptoms negatively impact musculoskeletal health and orthopedic outcomes, a gap remains in identifying modalities through which mental health intervention can realistically be delivered during orthopedic care. The purpose of this study was to understand orthopedic stakeholders' perceptions regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of digital, printed, and in-person intervention modalities to address mental health as part of orthopedic care.

METHODS

This single-center, qualitative study was conducted within a tertiary care orthopedic department. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and May 2022. Two stakeholder groups were interviewed using a purposive sampling approach until thematic saturation was reached. The first group included adult orthopedic patients who presented for management of ≥ 3 months of neck or back pain. The second group included early, mid, and late career orthopedic clinicians and support staff members. Stakeholders' interview responses were analyzed using deductive and inductive coding approaches followed by thematic analysis. Patients also performed usability testing of one digital and one printed mental health intervention.

RESULTS

Patients included 30 adults out of 85 approached (mean (SD) age 59 [14] years, 21 (70%) women, 12 (40%) non-White). Clinical team stakeholders included 22 orthopedic clinicians and support staff members out of 25 approached (11 (50%) women, 6 (27%) non-White). Clinical team members perceived a digital mental health intervention to be feasible and scalable to implement, and many patients appreciated that the digital modality offered privacy, immediate access to resources, and the ability to engage during non-business hours. However, stakeholders also expressed that a printed mental health resource is still necessary to meet the needs of patients who prefer and/or can only engage with tangible, rather than digital, mental health resources. Many clinical team members expressed skepticism regarding the current feasibility of scalably incorporating in-person support from a mental health specialist into orthopedic care.

CONCLUSIONS

Although digital intervention offers implementation-related advantages over printed and in-person mental health interventions, a subset of often underserved patients will not currently be reached using exclusively digital intervention. Future research should work to identify combinations of effective mental health interventions that provide equitable access for orthopedic patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Multi-stakeholder perspectives regarding preferred modalities for mental health intervention delivered in the orthopedic clinic: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Although depressive and anxious symptoms negatively impact musculoskeletal health and orthopedic outcomes, a gap remains in identifying modalities through which mental health intervention can realistically be delivered during orthopedic care. The purpose of this study was to understand orthopedic stakeholders' perspectives regarding the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of digital, printed, and in-person intervention modalities to address mental health as part of orthopedic care.

METHODS

This single-center, qualitative study was conducted within the orthopedic department of a tertiary care center. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between January and May 2022. Two stakeholder groups were interviewed using a purposive sampling approach until thematic saturation was reached. The first group included adult orthopedic patients who presented for management of ≥ 3 months of neck or back pain. The second group included early, mid, and late career orthopedic clinicians and support staff members. Stakeholders' interview responses were analyzed using deductive and inductive coding approaches followed by thematic analysis. Patients also performed usability testing of one digital and one printed mental health intervention.

RESULTS

Patients included 30 adults out of 85 approached (mean (SD) age 59 (14) years, 21 (70%) women, 12 (40%) non-White). Clinical team stakeholders included 22 orthopedic clinicians and support staff members out of 25 approached (11 (50%) women, 6 (27%) non-White). Clinical team members perceived a digital mental health intervention to be feasible and scalable to implement, and many patients appreciated that the digital modality offered privacy, immediate access to resources, and the ability to engage during non-business hours. However, stakeholders also expressed that a printed mental health resource is still necessary to meet the needs of patients who prefer and/or can only engage with tangible, rather than digital, mental health resources. Many clinical team members expressed skepticism regarding the current feasibility of scalably incorporating in-person mental health support into orthopedic care.

CONCLUSIONS

Although digital intervention offers implementation-related advantages over printed and in-person mental health interventions, a subset of often underserved patients will not currently be reached using exclusively digital intervention. Future research should work to identify combinations of effective mental health interventions that provide equitable access for orthopedic patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

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.

A qualitative study of the impact of a periacetabular osteotomy on patients' lives

AIMS

The aim of this study was to understand the experience of mature patients who undergo a periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), a major hip-preserving surgical procedure that treats symptomatic hip dysplasia by realigning the acetabulum. Our aim was to improve our understanding of how the operation affected the lives of patients and their families, with a long-term goal of improving their experience.

METHODS

We used a phenomenological approach with in-depth, semi-structured interviews to investigate the experience of seven female patients, aged between 25 and 40 years, who underwent a PAO. A modified homogeneity sampling approach coupled with criterion sampling was used. Inclusion criteria involved having at least one child at home and being in a committed relationship with a spouse or partner.

RESULTS

Analysis of interview transcripts revealed five major themes: feelings of frustration before having a treatment plan; fear of the operation; the importance of understanding the procedure in order to feel in control of their care; feelings of helplessness, dependence, and depression during recovery; and the need for support during recovery.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that both the physical and psychosocial burdens of undergoing a PAO are great, with a major impact on the patient and their family. Many important issues lie outside the scope of what healthcare teams currently address. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):781-785.

Digital mental health intervention for orthopedic patients with symptoms of depression and/or anxiety: Pilot feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Symptoms of depression and anxiety commonly coexist with chronic musculoskeletal pain, and when this occurs, standard orthopedic treatment is less effective. Nevertheless, addressing mental health is not yet a routine part of standard orthopedic treatment, in part due to access related barriers. Digital mental health intervention offers the potential to be a scalable resource that could feasibly be incorporated into orthopedic care.

OBJECTIVE

The primary purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of introducing a digital mental health intervention (Wysa) within an outpatient orthopedic setting to patients who endorse coexisting symptoms of depression and/or anxiety. The secondary purpose was to perform a preliminary effectiveness analysis of the intervention.

METHODS

In this single-arm, prospective cohort study, participants included adult patients (18 years and older) who presented to a non-surgical orthopedic specialist at a single tertiary care academic center for evaluation of a musculoskeletal condition and who self-reported symptoms of depression and/or anxiety (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression and/or Anxiety score ≥ 55). Enrollment was performed face-to-face by a research coordinator immediately after the participant's encounter with an orthopedic clinician. Participants were provided two months of access to a mobile app called Wysa, which is an established, multi-component digital mental health intervention that uses chatbot technology and text-based access to human counselors to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness training, and sleep tools, among other features. For this study, Wysa access also included novel, behavioral activation based features specifically developed for users with chronic pain. Primary feasibility outcomes included the study recruitment rate, retention rate, and engagement rate with Wysa (defined as engaging with a therapeutic Wysa tool at least once during the study period). Secondary effectiveness outcomes were between-group differences in mean longitudinal PROMIS mental and physical health score changes at two-month follow-up between high Wysa users and low Wysa users, defined by a median split.

RESULTS

The recruitment rate was 61/208 (29%), retention rate was 51/61 (84%), and engagement rate was 44/61 (72%). Compared to low users, high Wysa users achieved greater improvement in PROMIS Anxiety (between-group difference -4.2 points [95% CI -8.1 to -0.2], P=.044) at two-month follow-up. Between-group differences in PROMIS Depression (-3.2 points [-7.5 to 1.2], P=.15) and Pain Interference (-2.3 points [-6.3 to 1.7], P=.26) favored high users but did not meet statistical significance. Improvements in PROMIS Physical Function were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery of a digital mental health intervention within the context of orthopedic care is feasible and demonstrates potential to improve mental health and pain-related impairment to a clinically meaningful degree. Participants' engagement rates exceeded industry standards, and additional opportunities to improve recruitment and retention were identified. Further pilot study followed by a definitive, randomized controlled trial is warranted.

CLINICALTRIAL

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT202005219.