Current Trends in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Study of 4 Major Orthopaedic Journals

Background

More emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), but the myriad of PROMs makes standardization and cross-study comparison difficult. As the era of big data and massive total joint registries matures, it will be critical to identify and implement the best PROMs.

Methods

All abstracts published in the years 2004, 2009, 2014, and 2016 in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery—American volume, the Bone and Joint Journal, Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, and the Journal of Arthroplasty were reviewed. A PubMed search was performed with filters limiting results only to total knee, total hip, and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty articles with available abstracts. Each abstract was reviewed to identify all PROMs. Trends over time were evaluated using the Cochran-Armitage test. In the non-trend analysis, Pearson chi-square tests and one-way analysis of variance were performed.

Results

A total of 42 unique PROMs were used 1073 times across 644 studies. The number of PROMs in these 4 journals increased from 97 in 2004 to 228 in 2016 (P < .0001). The proportion of articles with more than one PROM increased from 20.6% in 2004 to 47.8% in 2016 (P = .0001). The most common PROMs used in total knee, total hip, and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty studies were the Knee Society Score, the Harris Hip Score, and the Oxford Knee Score, respectively.

Conclusion

Providers and registries should consider the relative prevalence of published outcome measures when selecting which PROMs to use, to better facilitate future cross-study comparison.