Social Determinants of Health and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty in Veterans

BackgroundSocial determinants of health (SDOH) are the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work, and age. They are associated with disparities in outcomes following total joint arthroplasty (TJA). These disparities occur even in equal-access healthcare systems such as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Our goal was to determine whether SDOH affect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following TJA in VHA patients.MethodsPatients scheduled to undergo total hip or knee arthroplasty at VHA Hospitals in Minneapolis, MN, Palo Alto, CA, and San Francisco, CA, prospectively completed PROMs before and 1 year after surgery. PROMs included the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and their Joint Replacement subscores. SDOH included race, ethnicity, marital status, education, and employment status. The level of poverty in each patient’s neighborhood was determined. Medical comorbidities were recorded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine whether SDOH were significantly associated with PROM improvement after surgery.ResultsOn multivariate analysis, black race was significantly negatively correlated with knee PROM improvement and Hispanic ethnicity was significantly negatively correlated with hip PROM improvement compared to whites. Higher baseline PROM scores and lower age were significantly associated with lower PROM improvement. Significant associations were also found based on education, gender, comorbidities, and neighborhood poverty.ConclusionMinority VHA patients have lower improvement in PROM scores after TJA than white patients. Further research is required to identify the reasons for these disparities and to design interventions to reduce them.     

Should We Aim to Help Patients “Feel Better” or “Feel Good” After Total Hip Arthroplasty? Determining Factors Affecting the Achievement of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State

BackgroundRecent attempts have been made to use preoperative patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) thresholds as prior authorization criteria based on the assumption that patients who have higher baseline scores are less likely to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). This study aimed to identify factors affecting the achievement of MCID and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) after total hip arthroplasty (THA), and to determine the overlap between the two outcomes.MethodsWe identified 3,581 primary, unilateral THAs performed at a single practice in 2015-2019. PROMs including Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS-JR) and 12-item Short Form Health Survey were collected preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. The likelihood of attaining PASS according to attainment of MCID was assessed. Multivariable regression was used to identify independent predictors of MCID and PASS.ResultsIn total, 79.8% achieved MCID and 73.6% achieved PASS for HOOS-JR. Approximately 1 in 7 patients who achieved MCID did not eventually achieve PASS. Worse preoperative HOOS-JR (odd ratio 0.933) was associated with MCID attainment. Better preoperative HOOS-JR (odd ratio 1.015) was associated with PASS attainment. Men, lower body mass index, better American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and better preoperative 12-item Short Form Health Survey mental score were predictors of MCID and PASS. Age, race, ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and smoking status were not significant predictors.ConclusionPreoperative PROMs were associated with achieving MCID and PASS after THA, albeit in opposite directions. Clinicians should strive to help patients “feel better” and “feel good” after surgery. Preoperative PROMs should not solely be used to prioritize access to care.     

The Paradox of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Should We Prioritize “Feeling Better” or “Feeling Good” After Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BackgroundThe use of preoperative patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) thresholds for patient selection in arthroplasty care has been questioned recently. This study aimed to identify factors affecting achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and determine the overlap between the two outcomes.MethodsWe identified 1,239 primary, unilateral TKAs performed at a single institution in 2015-2019. PROMs including the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) and 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) were collected preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. The likelihood of attaining PASS as per attainment of MCID was assessed. A multivariable regression was used to identify predictors of MCID and PASS.ResultsIn total, 71.3% achieved MCID and 75.5% achieved PASS for KOOS-JR. Only 7.7% achieved MCID but not PASS, whereas almost twice this number did not achieve MCID but did achieve PASS (11.9%). Poorer preoperative KOOS-JR (OR 0.925), better SF-12 physical (OR 1.025), and mental (OR 1.027) were associated with MCID attainment. In contrast, better preoperative KOOS-JR (OR 1.030) and SF-12 mental (OR 1.025) were associated with PASS attainment. Age, gender, race, ethnicity, body mass index, Charlson index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and smoking status were not significant predictors.ConclusionPreoperative PROMs were associated with achieving MCID and PASS after TKA, albeit some positively and some negatively. In the era of value-based care, clinicians should not only strive to help patients “feel better” but also ensure that patients “feel good” after surgery. This study does not support the use of PROMs in prioritizing access to care.     

Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Functional Assessment Using a Marker-Less Image Capture System in End-Stage Knee Arthritis

BackgroundPatient self-assessment of knee function in end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) and following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has become standard for defining disability. The relationship of PROMs to functional performance requires a continued investigation. The purpose of this study was to determine correlations between patient demographics, PROMs, and functional performances using a marker-less image capture system (MICS).MethodsPatients indicated for elective TKA completed the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) and an office-based functional assessment using a MICS. Patient age, body mass index (BMI), and gender were collected. A total of 112 patients were enrolled. Their mean age was 65.0 (±9.7) years, mean BMI was 32.5 (±6.6) kg/m², and mean KOOS-JR was 14.5 (±5.7). The relationships between patient characteristics, KOOS-JR, MICS Alignment (coronal), MICS Mobility (flexion), and composite Total Joint scores were described using Spearman’s correlation coefficients.ResultsBMI was weakly correlated with KOOS-JR (ρ = ?0.22, P = .024), whereas age was not. Age and BMI were not correlated with performance scores. There were weak to no correlations between KOOS-JR and MICS Alignment (ρ = ?0.01, P = .951), Mobility (ρ = 0.33, P < .001), and Total Joint scores (ρ = 0.06, P = .504).ConclusionThis study found no strong correlation between KOOS-JR and functional performance using a validated MICS for patients with end-stage knee OA. Further study is warranted in determining the relationship between PROMs and performance to optimize outcomes of patients undergoing nonoperative or surgical interventions for knee OA. The use of high-fidelity functional assessment tools that can be integrated into clinical workflow, such as the MICS used in this study, should permit PROM/functional performance comparisons in large populations.     

A Matched Comparison of the Rates of Achieving the Minimal Clinically Important Difference Following Conversion and Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are often lower following conversion total hip arthroplasty (cTHA) compared to matched primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) controls. However, the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for any PROMs are yet to be analyzed for cTHA. This study aimed to (1) determine if patients undergoing cTHA achieve primary THA-specific 1-year PROM MCIDs at comparable rates to matched controls undergoing primary THA and (2) establish 1-year MCID values for specific PROMs following cTHA.MethodsA retrospective case-control study was conducted using 148 cases of cTHA which were matched 1:2 to 296 primary THA patients. Previously defined anchor values for 2 PROM measures in primary THA were used to compare cTHA to primary THA, while novel cTHA-specific MCID values for 2 PROMs were calculated through a distribution method. Predictors of achieving the MCID of PROMs were analyzed through multivariate logistic regressions.ResultsConversion THA was associated with decreased odds of achieving the primary THA-specific 1-year Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement PROM (Odds Ratio: 0.319, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.182-0.560, P < .001) and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short-Form-10a PROM (Odds Ratio: 0.531, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.313-0.900, P = .019) MCIDs in reference to matched primary THA patients. Less than 60% of cTHA patients achieved an MCID. The 1-year MCID of the Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short-Form-10a specific to cTHA were +10.71 and +4.68, respectively.ConclusionWhile cTHA is within the same diagnosis-related group as primary THA, patients undergoing cTHA have decreased odds of achieving 1-year MCIDs of primary THA-specific PROMs.Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.     

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Health Short Forms Demonstrate Responsiveness in Patients Undergoing Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is an alternative to legacy outcome metrics. We investigated the relationship between Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR) and PROMIS Global Health forms of Physical Health (PH) and Mental Health (MH) in knee arthroplasty patients.MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of knee arthroplasty patients from December 2017 through April 2019 who had surveys collected preoperatively and postoperatively. We excluded patients undergoing revision surgery. Outcome scores were analyzed for responsiveness, effect size index (ESI), minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and correlation with each other through 12 months postoperatively.ResultsA total of 875 patients were included. Floor and ceiling effects were 0% for PROMIS-PH. Postoperative PROMIS-PH and KOOS-JR scores significantly correlated with one another and increased from baseline at each postoperative time point (P < .001 for all). PROMIS-MH did not change between time points (P > .05). PROMIS-PH showed moderate responsiveness at 1 and 3 months (ESI >0.2) and excellent responsiveness at 6 and 12 months (ESI >0.8), whereas KOOS-JR was responsive at all time points (ESI >0.8). The MCID of PROMIS-PH correlated significantly with KOOS-JR, and a preoperative PROMIS-PH score of less than 32.5 predicted achieving MCID with 97% specificity.ConclusionPROMIS global health forms are a valid metric which capture patient outcomes and correlate with KOOS-JR scores after knee arthroplasty. Although KOOS-JR may be more responsive in the early postoperative time period, both measures show excellent responsiveness at 6 and 12 months after knee arthroplasty.     

No Correlation Between Clinical Outcomes and Changes in the Tibia-Metaphyseal Angle Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Study

BackgroundDespite numerous advances in the implant design and surgical technique, improvement in patient satisfaction following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has plateaued. Various TKA alignment strategies have been introduced that impact the coronal positioning of the tibial component relative to the native joint line. This study aims to analyze if postoperative variance of the joint line from preoperative native alignment is correlated with changes in patient-reported outcomes following primary TKA.MethodsA retrospective review of an academic center’s patient population identified all primary TKAs between 2013 and 2021 with full-length, standing radiographs and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data. These measures included the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System, and Veterans RAND 12 scores. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic measurements for hip-knee angle, tibia-metaphyseal angle, tibial-axis orientation angle, and joint-line obliquity angle were recorded. Three-month, 1-year, and 2-year PROM scores were correlated with the change in degrees for each of the angles using a Spearman’s correlation. A Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare angular changes with a change in PROM scores.ResultsOne hundred and ninety nine patients (204 knees) with a mean age of 67 years were included. Average follow-up was 23 months. Three-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up rates were 93%, 64%, and 34%, respectively. Improvements were seen across all PROMs regardless of an angular change.ConclusionThere were no clear correlations between PROMs and variation in joint line obliquity in the coronal plane. These data suggest that the magnitude of the variation in coronal tibial alignment from native alignment does not impact PROMs. Further study is indicated to correlate an angular change with functional measures.     

The Short Form KOOS,JR Is Valid for Revision Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey, Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) is a reliable, responsive, and validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of knee health in patients with knee osteoarthritis undergoing unilateral primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The validity of the KOOS, JR for revision TKA remains unknown.MethodsWe identified 314 patients who underwent revision TKA and had completed preoperative and 2-year postoperative PROMs. Validation included assessment of local dependence, unidimensionality, internal consistency, external construct validity, responsiveness, and floor effects preoperatively and ceiling effects at 2 years postoperatively.ResultsAmong patients undergoing revision TKA, the KOOS, JR demonstrated an absence of residual item correlation, adequate unidimensionality, high internal consistency (Person Separation Index: 0.897), and high external construct validity with existing validated PROMs, including KOOS Pain (Spearman’s correlation coefficient 0.89) and KOOS activities of daily living (0.90) domains. The KOOS, JR was more responsive (standardized response means: 1.14) to revision TKA than other common knee PROMs. Three percent of revision TKA patients were at the floor (lowest score) preoperatively and 9% reached the ceiling (highest possible score) postoperatively.ConclusionsKOOS, JR performs well in revision TKA patients with regard to internal consistency, external validity, responsiveness, and floor and ceiling effects. Our results support extending its use to revision TKA in both clinical and research settings.     

Conversion Total Knee Arthroplasty After Failed Osteochondral Allograft Reconstruction: Similar Functional Performance With Lower Patient Satisfaction

BackgroundThis study presents surgical techniques used in conversion total knee arthroplasty (cTKA) following early failure of large osteochondral allograft joint replacement and compares postoperative patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs) and satisfaction scores with a contemporary primary total knee arthroplasty (pTKA) cohort.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 25 consecutive cTKA patients (26 procedures) to define the utilized surgical techniques, radiographic disease severity, preoperative and postoperative PROMs (visual analog scale [VAS] pain, knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint replacement [KOOS-JR], University of California Los Angeles Activity), expected improvement and postoperative satisfaction (5-point Likert), and reoperations in comparison with an age and body mass index propensity matched cohort of 50 pTKA performed for osteoarthritis (52 procedures).ResultsRevision components were used in 12 cTKA cases (46.1%), with 4 cases requiring augmentation (15.4%), and 3 cases utilizing varus-valgus constraint (11.5%). While no significant differences were noted in expectation level or in other PROMs, mean patient reported satisfaction was lower in the conversion group (4.4 ± 1.1 versus 4.8 ± 0.5 points, P = .02). High cTKA satisfaction was associated with a higher postoperative KOOS-JR (84.4 versus 64.2 points, P = .01) and a trend towards higher University of California Los Angeles activity (6.9 versus 5.7 points, P = .08). Four patients in each group underwent manipulation (15.3 versus 7.6%, P = .42), and 1 pTKA patient was treated for early postoperative infection (0 versus 1.9%, P = 1.0).ConclusioncTKA following failed biological replacement was associated with similar postoperative improvement as in pTKA. Lower patient-reported cTKA satisfaction was associated with lower postoperative KOOS-JR scores.     

The Benefit in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Total Knee Arthroplasty was Comparable Across Income Quartiles

BackgroundFew studies have assessed how socioeconomic status (SES) influences patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study evaluated the impact of patient median ZIP code income levels on PROMs after TKA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients at our institution undergoing primary, unilateral TKA from 2017 to 2020. Patients who did not have one-year postoperative PROMs were excluded. Patients were stratified based on the quartile of their home ZIP code median income from United States Census Bureau data. There were 1,267 patients included: 98 in quartile 1 (median income ≤ $46,308) (7.7%); 126 in quartile 2 (median income $46,309-$57,848) (10.0%); 194 in quartile 3 (median income $57,849-$74,011) (15.7%); and 849 in quartile 4 (median income ≥ $74,012) (66.4%). We collected baseline demographic data, 2-year outcomes, and PROMs preoperatively, as well as at 12 weeks and one year, postoperatively.ResultsThe Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement was significantly higher in quartile 4 preoperatively (P < .001), 12 weeks postoperatively (P < .001), and one year postoperatively (P < .001). There were no significant differences in delta improvements of Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement from preoperative to 12 weeks or one year postoperatively. There were no significant differences in lengths of stay, discharge dispositions, readmissions, or revisions.ConclusionPatients from lower income areas have slightly worse knee function preoperatively and worse outcomes following TKA. However, improvements in PROMs throughout the first year postoperatively are similar across income quartiles, suggesting that patients from lower income quartiles achieve comparable therapeutic benefits from TKA.Level III EvidenceRetrospective Cohort Study.     

Improvement in Sleep Patterns After Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Study in 780 Patients

BackgroundThis study assessed change in sleep patterns before and after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and its relationship to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).MethodsBetween July 2016 and June 2018, surgical data and PROMs were collected on 780 subjects before and 12 months after THA or TKA. PROMs included Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, patient satisfaction, and 2 questions from the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.ResultsBefore surgery, 35% (270 of 780) reported poor quality sleep. Sleep quality and duration were worse in females over males, and in THA patients (39%) over TKA patients (30%; P = .011). Of those reporting bad sleep, 74% (201 of 270) were improved after arthroplasty. Satisfaction was higher in subjects reporting good sleep quality (626 of 676; 93%) compared with those reporting bad sleep quality (67 of 86; 78%) (P = .001). Sleep was positively correlated with better Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score/Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (r = 0.2-0.3).ConclusionImprovement in sleep quality and duration can be expected after THA and TKA and is associated with better outcome scores and satisfaction.     

Relationship Between the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System and Traditional Patient-Reported Outcomes for Osteoarthritis

Background

Incorporating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is paramount to the creation of a value-based healthcare system that prioritizes patient-centered care in total joint arthroplasty. The relationship between global assessment PROs such as Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and joint-specific PROs for hip and knee, such as short form variations of Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS-JR) and Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS-JR), has yet to be assessed.

Outcomes Vary Significantly Using a Tiered Approach to Define Success After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROM) allow assessment of clinical outcomes following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study is to use progressively more stringent definitions of success to examine clinical outcomes of primary TKA at 1 year postoperatively and to determine which demographic variables were associated with achieving clinical success.MethodsThe American Joint Replacement Registry was queried from 2012 to 2020 for primary TKA. Patients who completed the following PROMs preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively were included: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and KOOS for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR). Mean PROM scores were determined for each visit and between-visit changes were evaluated using paired t-tests. Rates of achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by distribution-based and anchor-based criteria, Patient Acceptable Symptom State, and substantial clinical benefit were calculated. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between demographic variables and odds of clinical success.ResultsIn total, 12,341 TKAs were included. Mean improvement in PROM scores were as follows: KOOS JR, 29; WOMAC-Pain, 33; and WOMAC-Function, 31 (P < .0001 for all). Rates of achievement of each metric were the following: distribution-based MCID, 84%-87%; anchor-based MCID, 46%-79%; Patient Acceptable Symptom State, 54%-82%; and substantial clinical benefit, 68%-81%. Patient age and gender were the most influential demographic factors on achievement of clinical success.ConclusionClinical outcomes at 1 year following TKA vary significantly when using a tiered approach to define success. A tiered approach to interpretation of PROMs should be considered for future research and clinical assessment.     

Do Medicare’s Patient–Reported Outcome Measures Collection Windows Accurately Reflect Academic Clinical Practice?

BackgroundThe Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) mandates collection of patient–reported outcome measures (PROMs) for eligible total hip and total knee arthroplasty (THA and TKA) procedures during specific time periods that may not be attainable within routine academic practice.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected PROM data from a 2017 cohort of primary THA and TKA patients who completed the Patient–Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 global health survey in preoperative or postoperative time periods. The primary outcome was completion rates of Patient–Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 per the CJR collection periods (90-0 days preoperative and 270-365 days postoperative) compared to an extended postoperative collection period of 270-396 days. Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were used to analyze the association between survey completion rates and patient characteristics.ResultsOf the 860 primary THAs and TKAs in 2017, 725 (84.3%) had preoperative surveys completed 90-0 days before surgery. Among the 725 patients, 215 (29.7%) completed postoperative surveys within the CJR timeline of 270-365 days. Completion increased by 120 additional surveys (+16.5%) in the additional postoperative time period of 270-396 days (P < .001). No patient or procedural factors significantly correlated with a higher likelihood of postoperative PROM completion (P > .05 for all covariates).ConclusionIn an academic clinical practice, completion rates of postoperative PROMs as part of routine clinical practice within the CJR mandated period was low for THA and TKA patients. CJR may consider additional time beyond 365 days to improve PROM completion rates.     

Impact of Resilience on Outcomes of Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundResilience, defined as the ability to bounce back from stress, has been suggested as a predictor of surgical outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between resilience and patient-reported outcomes following primary elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We hypothesized that patients exhibiting greater preoperative resilience would report better outcome scores.MethodsA prospective cohort of 153 patients (74 male, 79 female) undergoing primary elective TKA completed questionnaires preoperatively and at 3 and 12 months following their index procedure. The validated Brief Resilience Scale was used to evaluate resilience. Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to analyze the effect of resilience on KOOS-JR (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score JR) and PROMIS-10 (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) outcome scores.ResultsAt 12 months, the change in the coefficient of determination (R²) attributable to preoperative resilience was 0.101 (P < .001) and 0.204 (P < .001) for physical and mental health, respectively. Although there was expected improvement in KOOS-JR scores following TKA, the effect of baseline resilience for this outcome was not significant. When evaluating resilience measured concurrently, there was significant correlation with both 3-month and 12-month KOOS-JR and PROMIS-10 outcome scores.ConclusionPreoperative resilience is a significant predictor of overall physical and mental health outcomes at both 3 and 12 months. Greater concurrent resilience predicted better scores across all outcomes. These findings suggest that major elective surgery, like other traumatic events, can cause a change in resilience. Although functional improvements after TKA are expected, those patients who exhibit greater resilience at baseline are more likely to report an improved quality of life.     

Robotics Versus Navigation Versus Conventional Total Hip Arthroplasty: Does the Use of Technology Yield Superior Outcomes?

BackgroundThe use of technology such as navigation and robotic systems may improve the accuracy of component positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA), but its impact on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) remains unclear. This study aims to elucidate the association between the use of intraoperative technology and PROMs in patients who underwent primary THA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of patients who underwent primary THA between 2016 and 2020 and answered PROM questionnaires. Patients were separated into 3 groups depending on intraoperative technology utilization: computer-assisted navigation, robotic-assisted, or no technology (conventional) THA. Forgotten Joint Score-12 and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacemen scores were collected at various time points. Demographic differences were assessed with chi-square and analysis of variance. Mean scores between groups were compared using univariate analysis of covariance, controlling for all significant demographic differences.ResultsOf the 1960 cases identified, 896 used navigation, 135 used robotics, and 929 used no technology. There were significant statistical differences in one-year Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement scores (85.23 vs 85.95 vs 86.76, respectively; P = .014) and two-year Forgotten Joint Score-12 scores (64.72 vs 73.35 vs 74.63, respectively; P = .004) between the 3 groups. However, these differences did not exceed the mean clinically important differences. Length of stay was statistically longest for patients who underwent conventionally performed THA versus navigation and robotics (2.22 vs 1.46 vs 1.91, respectively; P < .001). Surgical time was significantly longer for cases performed using robotics versus navigation and conventionally (119.61 vs 90.35 vs 95.35, respectively; P < .001).ConclusionStatistical differences observed between all modalities are not likely to be clinically meaningful with regard to early patient-reported outcomes. Although intraoperative use of technology may improve the accuracy of implant placement, these modalities have not yet translated into improved early reported functional outcomes.Level III EvidenceRetrospective cohort.     

Are Oxford Hip Score and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Useful Predictors of Clinical Meaningful Improvement and Satisfaction After Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BackgroundUp to 15% of patients express dissatisfaction after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Preoperative patient-report outcome measures (PROMs) scores can potentially mitigate this by predicting postoperative satisfaction, identifying patients that will benefit most from surgery. The aim of this study was to (1) calculate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds for Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) mental component summary (MCS) and physical component summary (PCS) scores and (2) identify the threshold values of these PROMs that could be used to predict patient satisfaction and expectation fulfilment.MethodsProspectively collected registry data of 1334 primary THA patients who returned for 2-year follow-up from 1998 to 2016 were reviewed. All patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 years using the OHS, WOMAC, and SF-36 PCS/MCS scores. The MCID for each PROMs was calculated, and the proportion of patients that attained MCID was recorded. The relationship between satisfaction, expectation fulfilment, and MCID attainment was analyzed using Spearman rank correlation. Optimal threshold scores for each PROM that predicted MCID attainment and satisfaction/expectation fulfilment at 2 years were calculated using receiver operating curve analysis.ResultsThe calculated MCID for OHS, WOMAC, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS were 5.2, 10.8, 6.7, and 6.2, respectively. A threshold value of 24.5 for the preoperative OHS was predictive of achieving WOMAC MCID at 2 years after THA (area under the curve 0.80, P < .001). 93.1% of patients were satisfied, and 95.5% had expectations fulfilled at 2 years. None of the PROMs were able to predict satisfaction.ConclusionOHS and WOMAC scores can be used to determine clinical meaningful improvement but are limited in their ability to predict patient satisfaction after THA.     

A One-Question Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Is Comparable to Multiple-Question Measures in Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important for tracking outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but can be limited by time constraints and patient compliance. We sought to evaluate the utility of the one-question, modified single assessment numerical evaluation (M-SANE) score in TKA patients compared to legacy PROMs.MethodsPatients undergoing TKA completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 (PROMIS-10), the Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score Junior (KOOS Jr), and M-SANE (modified-SANE) assessments both preoperatively and postoperatively. The M-SANE score asked patients to rate their native or prosthetic knee on a scale from 0 to 10, with 10 being the best function. M-SANE validity was determined by the Spearman’s correlation between the collected PROMs and the Bland-Altman plots. PROM responsiveness was assessed using the standardized response mean.ResultsIn total, 217 patients completed PROMs preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. Floor and ceiling effects of the M-SANE were higher than other PROMs but still relatively low (4%-11%). There was a moderate to strong correlation at nearly all time points between the M-SANE and KOOS Jr (ρ = 0.44-0.78, P < .001). There was a weak correlation between the M-SANE and PROMIS physical component summary at the preoperative evaluation (ρ = 0.28) but a strong correlation at 1-year follow up (0.65, P < .001). The long-term responsiveness of the M-SANE to TKA (standardized response mean [SRM] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.17) was comparable to both the KOOS Jr (SRM = 1.19, 95% CI 1.00-1.38) and PROMIS physical component summary (SRM = 0.82, 95% CI 0.74-0.91). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that the M-SANE and KOOS Jr capture combined knee pain and functionality differently.ConclusionThe M-SANE score was comparable to validated multiple-question PROMs in TKA patients. The demonstrated validity of the M-SANE, as well as its comparable responsiveness to more lengthy PROMs, highlights its use as a one-question PROM for assessment of patient undergoing TKA.     

The Effect of Joint Line Elevation on Patient-Reported Outcomes After Contemporary Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundJoint line elevation in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is considered a risk factor for inferior outcomes, engendering a dogmatic protocol of joint line restoration. However, this precedent is based on historical data using rudimentary revision systems and unvalidated outcome measures. This study’s purpose was to evaluate the effect of joint line height elevation on validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) using modern revision implants.MethodsA total of 327 rTKAs performed at a single institution were reviewed. Surgical technique prioritized flexion-extension gap balancing and accepted joint line elevation if necessary to achieve a balanced flexion space. Radiographic measurements included changes in joint line height (from preoperative and calculated “intended” anatomic/native) and change in posterior condylar offset. Prospectively collected PROMs were evaluated using multivariate regression.ResultsThe mean joint line elevation from preoperative and “intended” to postoperative joint line was 4.9 ± 5.7 mm and 7.2 ± 6.6 mm, respectively. The mean increase in posterior condylar offset was 1.0 ± 4.6 mm. Patients within ±5 mm of preoperative joint line height were 3.88× more likely to achieve the substantial clinical benefit for Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (P = .004). An increase from intended joint line height >5 mm was not associated with differences in any other PROMs (P ≥ .165).ConclusionsIn contemporary rTKA, recreating the joint line within 5 mm of preoperative improves knee-specific health outcomes. These data support approximating native joint line height as a viable technique to optimize flexion gap balance and subsequent patient outcomes in rTKA.Level of EvidenceLevel III retrospective cohort study.     

Disease Progression After Unicompartmental Arthroplasty: Add a Compartment or Revise to Total Knee Arthroplasty?

BackgroundFive percent to 7% of unicompartmental knee arthroplasties (UKA) require revision for disease progression in untreated compartment(s), most commonly to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). TKA requires removal of bone and usually the anterior cruciate ligament. Preserving the UKA and converting to a bicompartmental arthroplasty (BCA) by performing a second UKA is an alternative.MethodsThe results of 73 UKA-BCA patients were compared to 75 patients treated by UKA-TKA revision. Knee Society, Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement, and patient satisfaction scores were collected by a blinded therapist. Patients were asked about their implant preference and recovery. Twenty-two UKA-BCA revision patients had a UKA (6) or TKA (16) in the contralateral knee; thus, a direct comparison of UKA-BCA to both UKA and TKA was possible.ResultsOf the UKA-BCA patients, 69 (94%) had excellent or good, 2 (3%) fair, and 2 (3%) poor outcomes with 1 patient requiring revision to TKA. Of patients with a TKA in the contralateral knee, 13 (81%) preferred the UKA-BCA replacement and 3 (19%) preferred the TKA. All patients said the UKA-BCA revision recovery was similar or easier than their initial UKA. Of UKA-TKA revisions, 59 (79%) had excellent or good, 9 (12%) fair, and 7 (9%) poor outcomes. There was 1 wound infection and 1 re-revision in the UKA-BCA group and 1 wound infection and 3 re-revisions in the UKA-TKA group. The Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement and Knee Society Scores were better for UKA-BCA compared to UKA-TKA.ConclusionUKA-BCA is a successful treatment for disease progression following UKA.