Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form Research Articles

Linking Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) Scores to Adverse Event Data to Gain Insight in Overestimation of Postoperative PROM Improvement after Total Hip Arthroplasty and Total Knee Arthroplasty Due to Selective Non-Response

BackgroundTo gain insight into how clinically relevant improvement in Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) scores after Total Hip (THA) and Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) may be under- or overestimated, we compared PROM respondents and non-respondents on their adverse event rates and assessed whether adverse event occurrence was associated with clinically relevant PROM improvement from those without adverse events. MethodsAll primary THAs and TKAs performed in 19 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019 were included. The Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical function Short form (HOOS-PS) and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical function Short form (KOOS-PS) were used to assess the physical function after THA and TKA, respectively. Adverse events included 1-year revision, 30-day readmission, 30-day complications, and long (i.e., > 75th percentile) length-of-stay (LOS). A clinically relevant improvement was defined as at least a 10-point decrease in HOOS-PS and 9 points in KOOS-PS scores. Associations between adverse events and clinically relevant HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS improvement were assessed using binary logistic regression models adjusted for patient characteristics and clustering of patients within hospitals. ResultsThere were 20,338 THA and 18,082 TKA procedures included. Adverse events mostly occurred more frequently in HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS non-respondents than in respondents. The THA patients experiencing revision, complications, or long LOS were less likely to experience clinically relevant HOOS-PS improvements (odds ratios of 0.11 [0.06 to 0.20], 0.44 [0.30 to 0.63], and 0.66 [0.50 to 0.88], respectively). The TKA patients experiencing revision or long LOS were less likely to experience clinically relevant KOOS-PS improvements (odds ratios of 0.26 [0.12 to 0.55] and 0.63 [0.50 to 0.80], respectively). ConclusionClinically-relevant HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS improvements are likely overestimated, as non-respondents had higher adverse event rates which were associated with lower likelihood to achieve clinically-relevant HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS improvements.

The mind matters: Psychological factors influence subjective outcomes following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-A prospective study.

This study aimed to investigate how psychological factors, including pain catastrophizing (PC), anxiety and depression affect preoperative and postoperative subjective outcomes in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). A prospective comparative study was performed among 150 patients undergoing medial or lateral UKA for isolated unicompartmental osteoarthritis. Patients were categorized based on their preoperative PC and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, stratifying them into groups with PC, anxiety or depression, and those without these psychological factors. Patient-reported outcomes, including the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical function Short form (KOOS-PS), 5-level EQ5D Visual Analogue Scale (EQ5D-VAS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Numeric Rating Scale for pain (NRS-pain) were compared between groups preoperatively and at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up. At 24 months, PC patients had inferior outcomes in KOOS-PS (66.9 ± 16.5 vs. 77.6 ± 14.7, p = .008), EQ5D-VAS (63.5 ± 19.9 vs. 78.9 ± 20.1, p = .003) and FJS (73.7 ± 14.3 vs. 84.6 ± 13.8, p = .003). Anxiety was associated with inferior KOOS-PS (65.4 ± 15.2 vs. 78.2 ± 14.5, p = <.001), EQ5D-VAS (64.2 ± 23.2 vs. 79.3 ± 19.4, p = .002), FJS (75.7 ± 16.8 vs. 84.6 ± 13.4, p = .008) and NRS-pain (27.4 ± 24.6 vs. 13.7 ± 19.3, p = .023) at 24 months. Depression consistently resulted in inferior outcomes in KOOS-PS, EQ5D-VAS, FJS and NRS-pain across all follow-up assessments (p = <.05). Additionally, patients with anxiety and depression experienced longer length of hospital stay compared to those without these psychological factors (anxiety: 2.3 ± 2.3 vs. 0.8 ± 0.8 days, p = .006; depression: 2.3 ± 2.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.8 days, p = .017). Preoperative PC, anxiety and depression are associated with inferior subjective outcomes both prior to and following UKA. Among these factors, depression seemed to exert the most substantial adverse impact on outcomes following UKA. Patients with anxiety and depression had an extended duration of hospitalization lasting over twice as long as patients without these psychological factors. It seems that inferior outcomes primarily stem from the suboptimal preoperative condition rather than an inherent inability to benefit from UKA. Level II, prospective study.

Total knee arthroplasty following lateral closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy versus primary total knee arthroplasty: a propensity score matching study

BackgroundThe disparity in patient-reported outcomes between total knee arthroplasty (TKA) following high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and primary TKA has yet to be fully comprehended. This study aims to compare the patient-reported outcomes, radiological parameters and complication rates between TKA following HTO and primary TKA.MethodsSixty-five patients who underwent TKA following lateral closing-wedge HTO were compared to a matched group of primary TKA at postoperative 6-months and 1-year. Between-group confounders of age, gender, smoking status, Body Mass index, preoperative Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain in rest, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical function Shortform (KOOS-PS), EuroQol five-dimensional (EQ-5D) overall health score, and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) were balanced by propensity score matching. Patient-reported outcome measures were NRS pain in rest, KOOS-PS, EQ-5D overall health score, and OKS. Radiological parameters were femorotibial angle, medial proximal tibial angle, anatomical lateral distal femoral angle, posterior tibial slope, and patellar height assessed by Insall-Salvati ratio. The complication rates of TKA were compared between the two groups. The HTO survival time, the choice of staple removal before or during TKA in patients who underwent TKA following HTO patients, and the rate of patellar resurfacing were assessed. The p value < 0.0125 indicates statistical significance after Bonferroni correction.ResultsAfter propensity score matching, no significant between-group differences in the patient-reported outcome measures, radiographical parameters and complication rates were found (p > 0.0125). In the TKA following HTO group, with an average HTO survival time of 8.7 years, staples were removed before TKA in 46 patients (71%) and during TKA in 19 patients, and 11 cases (17%) had patella resurfacing. In the primary TKA group, 15 cases (23%) had patella resurfacing.ConclusionThe short-term assessment of TKA following HTO indicates outcomes similar to primary TKA. A previous HTO does not impact the early results of subsequent TKA, suggesting that the previous HTO has minimal influence on TKA outcomes.Level of evidenceIII, cohort study.

Time to Achieve the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Comparison of Anterior and Posterior Surgical Approaches

BackgroundControversy remains over outcomes between total hip arthroplasty approaches. This study aimed to compare the time to achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global-Physical for patients who underwent anterior and posterior surgical approaches in primary total hip arthroplasty. MethodsPatients from 2018 to 2021 with preoperative and postoperative HOOS-PS or PROMIS Global-Physical questionnaires were grouped by approach. Demographic and MCID achievement rates were compared, and survival curves with and without interval-censoring were used to assess the time to achieve the MCID by approach. Log-rank and weighted log-rank tests were used to compare groups, and Weibull regression analyses were performed to assess potential covariates. ResultsA total of 2,725 patients (1,054 anterior and 1,671 posterior) were analyzed. There were no significant differences in median MCID achievement times for either the HOOS-PS (anterior: 5.9 months, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.6 to 6.4; posterior: 4.4 months, 95% CI: 4.1 to 5.1, P = .65) or the PROMIS Global-Physical (anterior: 4.2 months, 95% CI: 3.5 to 5.3; posterior: 3.5 months, 95% CI: 3.4 to 3.8, P = .08) between approaches. Interval-censoring revealed earlier times of achieving the MCID for both the HOOS-PS (anterior: 1.509 to 1.511 months; posterior: 1.7 to 2.3 months, P = .87) and the PROMIS Global-Physical (anterior: 3.0 to 3.1 weeks; posterior: 2.7 to 3.3 weeks, P = .18) for both surgical approaches. ConclusionsThe time to achieve the MCID did not differ by surgical approach. Most patients will achieve clinically meaningful improvements in physical function much earlier than previously believed. Level of EvidenceLevel III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Men and women undergoing total hip arthroplasty have different clinical presentations before surgery and different outcomes at 1-year follow-up.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of sex on patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) for hip osteoarthritis (HOA), aiming to assess the clinical and functional outcomes using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing THA at Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'Ambrogio between 2016 and 2022 was conducted. Inclusion criteria encompassed Kellgren-Lawrence grade III or IV HOA, with preoperative and 12-month postoperative PROMs. Enroled patients have been selected from a larger cohort without matching design for confounders. The analyses were performed using R software v4.0.3 (R Core Team) and data distributions were assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk normality test. One hundred ninety patients (72 male and 118 female) who had both preoperative and postoperative PROMs have been analysed from our institutional prosthesis registry (Datareg). Baseline and 12-month post-THA PROMs showed significant improvements overall. VAS score dropped notably from baseline to 3 months postsurgery (7.1 ± 2.1 vs. 0.9 ± 1.7). Functional and mental PROMs, including Harris Hip Score-functional (HHS-F), Harris Hip Score-total (HHS-t), SF-12PSand SF-12MS, exhibited substantial improvements post-THA. Stratifying by sex, males had lower baseline VAS, higher HHS-F, SF-12MSand hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score-physical function short form (HOOS-PS). At 12 months, males displayed significantly better VAS, HHS-F, SF-12PSand HOOS-PS scores. Complication rates were minimal (1.5%), with stable rates across genders, mostly involving dislocation and periprosthetic fractures. Implant survival at 12 months reached an impressive 99%. THA remains an effective treatment for severe HOA. However, females presented with worse baseline conditions and showed relatively less improvement at 1-year postsurgery compared to males. This difference could be attributed to physiological and psychosocial factors associated with sex, including hormonal changes, muscle mass declineand perception of pain. Longer follow-ups and prospective studies are necessary to validate these findings and facilitate personalised approaches in HOA treatment, emphasising the need for careful consideration of sex-related variables in clinical decision-making for THA patients. Level III.

Who Benefits From Hip Arthroplasty or Knee Arthroplasty? Preoperative Patient-reported Outcome Thresholds Predict Meaningful Improvement.

Hip arthroplasty (HA) and knee arthroplasty (KA) are high-volume procedures. However, there is a debate about the quality of indication; that is, whether surgery is truly indicated in all patients. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may be used to determine preoperative thresholds to differentiate patients who will likely benefit from surgery from those who will not. (1) What were the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) for three commonly used PROMs in a large population of patients undergoing HA or KA treated in a general orthopaedic practice? (2) Do patients who reach the MCID differ in important ways from those who do not? (3) What preoperative PROM score thresholds best distinguish patients who achieve a meaningful improvement 12 months postsurgery from those who do not? (4) Do patients with preoperative PROM scores below thresholds still experience gains after surgery? Between October 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, 4182 patients undergoing HA and 3645 patients undergoing KA agreed to be part of the PROMoting Quality study and were hence included by study nurses in one of nine participating German hospitals. From a selected group of 1843 patients with HA and 1546 with KA, we derived MCIDs using the anchor-based change difference method to determine meaningful improvements. Second, we estimated which preoperative PROM score thresholds best distinguish patients who achieve an MCID from those who do not, using the preoperative PROM scores that maximized the Youden index. PROMs were Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function short form (HOOS-PS) (scored 0 to 100 points; lower indicates better health), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function short form (KOOS-PS) (scored 0 to 100 points; lower indicates better health), EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L) (scored -0.661 to 1 points; higher indicates better health), and a 10-point VAS for pain (perceived pain in the joint under consideration for surgery within the past 7 days) (scored 0 to 10 points; lower indicates better health). The performance of derived thresholds is reported using the Youden index, sensitivity, specificity, F1 score, geometric mean as a measure of central tendency, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. MCIDs for the EQ-5D-5L were 0.2 for HA and 0.2 for KA, with a maximum of 1 point, where higher values represented better health-related quality of life. For the pain scale, they were -0.9 for HA and -0.7 for KA, of 10 points (maximum), where lower scores represent lower pain. For the HOOS-PS, the MCID was -10, and for the KOOS-PS it was -5 of 100 points, where lower scores represent better functioning. Patients who reached the MCID differed from patients who did not reach the MCID with respect to baseline PROM scores across the evaluated PROMs and for both HA and KA. Patients who reached an MCID versus those who did not also differed regarding other aspects including education and comorbidities, but this was not consistent across PROMs and arthroplasty type. Preoperative PROM score thresholds for HA were 0.7 for EQ-5D-5L (Youden index: 0.55), 42 for HOOS-PS (Youden index: 0.27), and 3.5 for the pain scale (Youden index: 0.47). For KA, the thresholds were 0.6 for EQ-5D-5L (Youden index: 0.57), 39 for KOOS-PS (Youden index: 0.25), and 6.5 for the pain scale (Youden index: 0.40). A higher Youden index for EQ-5D-5L than for the other PROMs indicates that the thresholds for EQ-5D-5L were better for distinguishing patients who reached a meaningful improvement from those who did not. Patients who did not reach the thresholds could still achieve MCIDs, especially for functionality and the pain scale. We found that patients who experienced meaningful improvements (MCIDs) mainly differed from those who did not regarding their preoperative PROM scores. We further identified that patients undergoing HA or KA with a score above 0.7 or 0.6, respectively, on the EQ-5D-5L, below 42 or 39 on the HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS, or below 3.5 or 6.5 on a 10-point joint-specific pain scale presurgery had no meaningful benefit from surgery. The thresholds can support clinical decision-making. For example, when thresholds indicate that a meaningful improvement is not likely to be achieved after surgery, other treatment options may be prioritized. Although the thresholds can be used as support, patient preferences and medical expertise must supplement the decision. Future studies might evaluate the utility of using these thresholds in practice, examine how different thresholds can be combined as a multidimensional decision tool, and derive presurgery thresholds based on additional PROMs used in practice. Preoperative PROM score thresholds in this study will support clinicians in decision-making through objective measures that can improve the quality of the recommendation for surgery.

Mental Health Effects on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Total Joint Arthroplasty.

The effect of mental health on patient-reported outcome measures is not fully understood in total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Thus, we investigated the relationship between mental health diagnoses (MHDs) and the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for Improvement (MCID-I) and Worsening (MCID-W) in primary TJA and revision TJA (rTJA). Retrospective data were collected using relevant Current Procedural Terminology and MHDs International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes with completed Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form, Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Physical Function Short Form 10a, PROMIS Global-Mental, or PROMIS Global-Physical questionnaires. Logistic regressions and statistical analyses were used to determine the effect of a MHD on MCID-I/MCID-W rates. Data included 4,562 patients (4,190 primary TJAs/372 rTJAs). In primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA), MHD-affected outcomes for Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (MCID-I: 81% versus 86%, P = 0.007; MCID-W: 6.0% versus 3.2%, P = 0.008), Physical Function Short Form 10a (MCID-I: 68% versus 77%, P < 0.001), PROMIS Global-Mental (MCID-I: 38% versus 44%, P = 0.009), and PROMIS Global-Physical (MCID-I: 61% versus 73%, P < 0.001; MCID-W: 14% versus 7.9%, P < 0.001) versus pTHA patients without MHD. A MHD led to lower rates of MCID-I for PROMIS Global-Physical (MCID-I: 56% versus 63%, P = 0.003) in primary total knee arthroplasty patients. No effects from a MHD were observed in rTJA patients. The presence of a MHD had a prominent negative influence on pTHA patients. Patients who underwent rTJA had lower MCID-I rates, higher MCID-W rates, and lower patient-reported outcome measure scores despite less influence from a MHD. Level III, retrospective comparative study.

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

BackgroundArthroplasty 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. MethodsBetween 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. ResultsAmong 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%]). ConclusionsAll 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.

THU394 Disease Burden Of X-Linked Hypophosphatemia Focused On The United States And Canada: A Targeted Literature Review

Abstract Disclosure: Z. Li: Employee; Self; Employee of Kyowa Kirin, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA. O. Zaidi: Other; Self; Employee of OPEN Health and received funding to complete this research. C. Chukwu: Other; Self; Employee of OPEN Health and received funding to complete this research. H. Heerssen: Other; Self; Employee of Kyowa Kirin, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA. Y. Zhao: Other; Self; Employee of Kyowa Kirin, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA. A. Dale: Other; Self; Employee of Kyowa Kirin, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA. M. Bernauer: Other; Self; Employee of OPEN Health and received funding to complete this research. Introduction: X-linked hypophosphatemia (XLH) is a rare genetic musculoskeletal disease and the most common form of heritable hypophosphatemic rickets. The objective of this review was to summarize the disease burden and treatment patterns of XLH in the United States (US) and Canada. Methods: Publications from January 1, 2015, to June 3, 2022, were searched using the Medline, Embase, and EconLit databases. Observational studies reporting epidemiology, humanistic burden, economic burden, and treatment patterns in the US and Canada were included. Evidence on epidemiology, humanistic burden, and treatment patterns was expanded to other countries as limited US and Canada studies were identified. Results: A total of 1,218 publications were screened; 42 publications were included (6 from US or Canada; 36 did not report location or were from other countries). Epidemiology data (i.e., incidence, prevalence, mortality) were limited for patients with XLH in the US and Canada. The estimated number of people in the US with XLH was &amp;lt;50,000 in 2021. Globally, the incidence of XLH was estimated at 3.9 per 100,000 live births, and the prevalence ranged from 1.4 per 100,000 to 4.8 per 100,000. One United Kingdom-based study estimated an XLH mortality rate of 12.1 per 1,000 person-years. Sixteen publications reported clinical manifestations of XLH, which showed a high level of heterogeneity. Among children with XLH, frequent clinical manifestations (&amp;gt;80% in 1 or more publications) included active rickets, diminished height, gait disturbance, bone or joint pain, and leg bowing. Among adults with XLH, frequent clinical manifestations (&amp;gt;80% in 1 or more publications) included short stature, leg deformity, musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, osteoarthritis, enthesophytes, gait disturbance, dental abscesses, and joint stiffness or restricted range of motion. Humanistic burden data from the US was limited to 2 non-trial publications, which used, respectively, the 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS) instruments. These 2 publications reported lower health-related quality of life for patients with XLH compared with the general population. No publication was identified on economic burden, treatment patterns, or XLH guidelines in the US or Canada. A consensus statement from a US panel of experts recommends individualization of monitoring and disease management due to clinical heterogeneity. Conclusions: There are limited published data on disease burden or treatment patterns for XLH in the US or Canada. Further research should consider the epidemiological, humanistic, and economic burden of XLH among pediatric and adult populations in these countries. Presentation: Thursday, June 15, 2023

Patients Consistently Report Worse Outcomes Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Compared to Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundDifferences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between primary TKA (pTKA) and revision TKA (rTKA) have not been well-studied. Therefore, we compared pTKA and rTKA patients by the rates of achieving the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for Improvement (MCID-I) and Worsening (MCID-W). MethodsA total of 2,448 patients (2,239 pTKAs/209 rTKAs) were retrospectively studied. Patients who completed the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF10a), PROMIS Global-Mental, or PROMIS Global-Physical questionnaires were identified by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Patient-reported outcome measures and MCID-I/MCID-W rates were compared. Multivariate logistic regression models measured relationships between surgery type and postoperative outcomes. ResultsPatients who underwent rTKA (all causes) had lower rates of improvement and higher rates of worsening compared to pTKA patients for KOOS-PS (MCID-I: 54 versus 68%, P < .001; MCID-W: 18 versus 8.6%, P < .001), PF10a (MCID-I: 44 versus 65%, P < .001; MCID-W: 22 versus 11%, P < .001), PROMIS Global-Mental (MCID-I: 34 versus 45%, P = .005), and PROMIS Global-Physical (MCID-I: 51 versus 60%, P = .014; MCID-W: 29 versus 14%, P < .001). Undergoing revision was predictive of worsening postoperatively for KOOS-PS, PF10a, and PROMIS Global-Physical compared to pTKA. Postoperative scores were significantly higher for all 4 PROMs following pTKA. ConclusionPatients reported significantly less improvement and higher rates of worsening following rTKA, particularly for PROMs that assessed physical function. Although pTKA patients did better overall, the improvement rates may be considered relatively low and should prompt discussions on improving outcomes following pTKA and rTKA. Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.

Clinical and Radiological Results of Patients Treated with Talon Distalfix Femoral Intramedullary Nail for Femoral Shaft Fractures

Objective: Talon distalfix intramedullary nails have been developed as a solution to the technical difficulties experienced during the placement of locking screws. We aimed to evaluate the radiological and clinical results of retractable talon distal fix for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.&#x0D; Material and Method: Between January 2017 and January 2022, 28 patients with femoral shaft AO type 32-A and B fractures were treated with Talon distalfix nails. AO Type 32-A and B fractures were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, follow-up times, ASA of Anesthesiologists classification and fracture type were recorded. The duration of the operation, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy time (in min), and time to bone union were recorded. General and technical complications (nonunion, malunion, malrotation, and shortening) were evaluated. Clinical functional outcomes were evaluated using the Knee Injury and the Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS), Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS) and Thoresen criteria.&#x0D; Results: A total of 28 patients (11 female and 17 male) were included in the study. The mean age was 46.8 years and the mean follow-up was 23.7 months. . The mean time to bone union was 22.6 weeks. No nonunion was observed in any of the patients. The mean hospital stay was 3.4 days and the mean Body Mass Index was 24.2. The mean operation time was 40.3±3.4 minutes and the mean scope time was 26.9 seconds. The mean KOOS-PS score and HOOS-PS were 83.4 and 85.6, respectively.&#x0D; Conclusion: Talon distalfix nails can be safely used in AO type A-B fractures of the midshaft femur. Talon distalfix nail application provides advantages including shorter operation times, less radiation exposure, fewer surgical incisions, and less blood loss. In addition, it should be emphasized that the union time is prolonged compared with that of conventional nails.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Demonstrate Less Improvement and Significantly Higher Rates of Worsening Compared to Primaries

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide the patient’s perspective following total hip arthroplasty (THA), although differences between primary THA (pTHA) and revision THA (rTHA) remain unclear. Thus, we compared the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for Improvement (MCID-I) and Worsening (MCID-W) in pTHA and rTHA patients. MethodsData from 2,159 patients (1,995 pTHAs/164 rTHAs) who had completed Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF10a), PROMIS Global-Mental, or PROMIS Global-Physical questionnaires were analyzed. The PROMs and MCID-I/MCID-W rates were compared using statistical tests and multivariate logistic regressions. ResultsCompared to the pTHA group, the rTHA group had lower rates of improvement and higher rates of worsening for almost all PROMs, including HOOS-PS (MCID-I: 54 versus 84%, P < .001; MCID-W: 24 versus 4.4%, P < .001), PF10a (MCID-I: 44 versus 73%, P < .001; MCID-W: 22 versus 5.9%, P < .001), PROMIS Global-Mental (MCID-W: 42 versus 28%, P < .001), and PROMIS Global-Physical (MCID-I: 41 versus 68%, P < .001; MCID-W: 26 versus 11%, P < .001). Odds ratios supported rates of worsening following revision for the HOOS-PS (Odds Ratio (OR): 8.25, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 5.62 to 12.4, P < .001), PF10a (OR: 8.34, 95% CI: 5.63 to 12.6, P < .001), PROMIS Global-Mental (OR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.41 to 3.34, P < .001), and PROMIS Global-Physical (OR: 3.69, 95% CI: 2.46 to 5.62, P < .001). ConclusionPatients reported higher rates of worsening and lower rates of improvement following rTHA than pTHA, with significantly less score improvement and lower postoperative scores for all PROMs after revision. Most patients reported improvements following pTHA, with few worsening postoperatively. Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.

Evaluation of Force Sense, Functional Performance, Quality of Life, Activity Level and Kinesiophobia in Degenerative Meniscal Tears Following Partial Meniscectomy

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare functional performance, force sense of knee joint, kinesiophobia, quality of life, and activity level between patients with partial meniscectomy and healthy people.&#x0D; Methods: Twenty patients with partial meniscectomy within six months to three years postoperatively and 20 healthy were included in this study. Maximal voluntary isometric muscle strength of Quadriceps femoris muscle and force sense with the biofeedback device, quality of life with Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool, functional performance with stair up/down test, physical function with Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form, activity level with Tegner Activity Level scale, kinesiophobia was evaluated with Brief Fear of Movement Scale.&#x0D; Results: Range of motion, maximal voluntary isometric muscle strength of M. Quadriceps femoris, and force sense decreased in the operated leg compared with the non-operated leg (p

Preoperative Pain Catastrophizing Prior to Total Knee Arthroplasty is Associated With Worse Preoperative Symptoms and More Clinical Improvement: A Prospective Comparative Study

BackgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a reliable procedure for end-stage osteoarthritis with excellent long-term survivorship, but approximately 15% of patients are not satisfied. Pain catastrophizing (PC) has been proposed as a potential cause but current evidence is limited to smaller studies with short-term follow-up. Our goal was to assess outcomes following TKA in a large cohort with and without PC. MethodsA prospective comparative study was performed with patients undergoing unilateral primary TKA between 2019 and 2021 with 2-year follow-up. All patients completed a PC Scale questionnaire preoperatively and a score of minimum 30 was considered PC. Outcomes consisted of Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), numeric rating scale Pain, and aseptic revisions. Ultimately, 301 patients were included (mean age 69 years [range, 30-92 years], with 60.8% women). Forty four patients (14.6%) had PC. ResultsPreoperatively, PC patients had inferior KOOS-PS, inferior OKS, and more pain than non-PC patients (all P < .001). PC patients had more improvement from preoperatively to 6 months postoperatively for KOOS-PS, OKS, and pain (all P < .05) and to 12 months for KOOS-PS and OKS (both P < .005). Similarly, PC patients had more improvement from preoperative to 24 months for OKS (P = .003). At 24 months, however, PC patients reported more pain than non-PC patients. There was no difference in revision rates (P = .192). ConclusionPatients who had PC reported worse function and pain preoperatively but had more improvement to 6 months and 12 months postoperatively. At 24 months, similar subjective function was noted, although PC patients reported more pain.

The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform Does Not Adequately Represent Physical Functioning in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty

ObjectivesA frequently used patient-reported outcome measure for assessing physical functioning in patients with hip problems is the 5-item Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS). Nevertheless, its content validity (whether this instrument adequately reflects the construct of physical functioning) is unknown. This study aimed to assess the content validity of the HOOS-PS. MethodsA quantitative and qualitative research approach was used. Physical functioning was defined as the ability to perform activities that require physical actions, ranging from self-care to more complex activities that require a combination of skills, often within a social context. Patients (n = 51) and experts (n = 25) completed questionnaires regarding the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the HOOS-PS. Semistructured interviews (n = 5) explored issues identified in the quantitative data in more depth. Thematic content analysis was conducted using a coding frame. ResultsOne of the 5 items was considered relevant to measure physical functioning. Comprehensiveness was considered insufficient by both patients and experts. Furthermore, comprehensibility was considered inadequate. Several items were found ambiguous or double barreled. Regarding interpretability, floor or ceiling effects were not found. ConclusionsThis study showed concerns about the content validity of the HOOS-PS: most items are considered not relevant, the HOOS-PS is considered not comprehensive, and several items are considered not comprehensible. These findings challenge the applicability of the HOOS-PS in clinical practice, research, value-based healthcare, and benchmarking.

How do Patient-reported Outcome Scores in International Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Registries Compare?

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the only systematic approach through which the patient's perspective can be considered by surgeons (in determining a procedure's efficacy or appropriateness) or healthcare systems (in the context of value-based healthcare). PROMs in registries enable international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after total joint arthroplasty, but the extent to which those scores may vary between different registry populations has not been clearly defined. (1) To what degree do mean change in general and joint-specific PROM scores vary across arthroplasty registries, and to what degree is the proportion of missing PROM scores in an individual registry associated with differences in the mean reported change scores? (2) Do PROM scores vary with patient BMI across registries? (3) Are comorbidity levels comparable across registries, and are they associated with differences in PROM scores? Thirteen national, regional, or institutional registries from nine countries reported aggregate PROM scores for patients who had completed PROMs preoperatively and 6 and/or 12 months postoperatively. The requested aggregate PROM scores were the EuroQol-5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D) index values, on which score 1 reflects "full health" and 0 reflects "as bad as death." Joint-specific PROMs were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), with total scores ranging from 0 to 48 (worst-best), and the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function shortform (KOOS-PS) values, scored 0 to 100 (worst-best). Eligible patients underwent primary unilateral THA or TKA for osteoarthritis between 2016 and 2019. Registries were asked to exclude patients with subsequent revisions within their PROM collection period. Raw aggregated PROM scores and scores adjusted for age, gender, and baseline values were inspected descriptively. Across all registries and PROMs, the reported percentage of missing PROM data varied from 9% (119 of 1354) to 97% (5305 of 5445). We therefore graphically explored whether PROM scores were associated with the level of data completeness. For each PROM cohort, chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (men versus women; age 20 to 64 years, 65 to 74 years, and older than 75 years; and high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were evaluated descriptively by comparing proportions with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification of 3 or higher across registries for each PROM cohort. The mean improvement in EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.16 to 0.33 for hip registries and 0.12 to 0.25 for knee registries. The mean improvement in the OHS (seven registries) ranged from 18 to 24, and for the HOOS-PS (three registries) it ranged from 29 to 35. The mean improvement in the OKS (six registries) ranged from 15 to 20, and for the KOOS-PS (four registries) it ranged from 19 to 23. For all PROMs, variation was smaller when adjusting the scores for differences in age, gender, and baseline values. After we compared the registries, there did not seem to be any association between the level of missing PROM data and the mean change in PROM scores. The proportions of patients with BMI 30 kg/m 2 or higher ranged from 16% to 43% (11 hip registries) and from 35% to 62% (10 knee registries). Distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed across hip and knee registries. Further, for all PROMs, distributions also differed across 12 predefined PROM strata. For the EQ-5D, patients in the younger age groups (20 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years) had higher proportions of BMI measurements greater than 30 kg/m 2 than older patients, and patients with the lowest baseline scores had higher proportions of BMI measurements more than 30 kg/m 2 compared with patients with higher baseline scores. These associations were similar for the OHS and OKS cohorts. The proportions of patients with ASA Class at least 3 ranged across registries from 6% to 35% (eight hip registries) and from 9% to 42% (nine knee registries). Improvements in PROM scores varied among international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, gender, and preoperative scores. Higher BMI tended to be associated with lower preoperative PROM scores across registries. Large variation in BMI and comorbidity distributions across registries suggest that future international studies should consider the effect of adjusting for these factors. Although we were not able to evaluate its effect specifically, missing PROM data is a recurring challenge for registries. Demonstrating generalizability of results and evaluating the degree of response bias is crucial in using registry-based PROMs data to evaluate differences in outcome. Comparability between registries in terms of specific PROMs collection, postoperative timepoints, and demographic factors to enable confounder adjustment is necessary to use comparison between registries to inform and improve arthroplasty care internationally. Level III, therapeutic study.

Linking Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form and PROMIS Physical Function.

Linking scores on patient-reported outcome measures can enable data aggregation for research, clinical care, and quality. We aimed to link scores on the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) and the Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS PF). A retrospective study was conducted from 2017 to 2020 evaluating patients with hip osteoarthritis who received routine clinical care from an orthopaedic surgeon. Our sample included 3,382 unique patients with 7,369 pairs of HOOS-PS and PROMIS PF measures completed at a single nonsurgical, preoperative, or postoperative time point. We included one randomly selected time point of scores for each patient in our linking analysis sample. We compared the accuracy of linking using four methods, including equipercentile and item response theory-based approaches. PROMIS PF and HOOS-PS scores were strongly correlated ( r = -0.827 for raw HOOS-PS scores and r = 0.820 for summary HOOS-PS scores). The assumptions were met for equipercentile and item response theory approaches to linking. We selected the item response theory-based Stocking-Lord approach as the optimal crosswalk and estimated item parameters for the HOOS-PS items on the PROMIS metric. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated overall robustness of the crosswalk estimates in nonsurgical, preoperative, and postoperative patients. These crosswalks can be used to convert scores between HOOS-PS and PROMIS PF metric at the group level, which can be valuable for data aggregation. Conversion of individual patient-level data is not recommended secondary to increased risk of error.

Hidden association of knee-related disability with physical activities among community-dwelling older male Saudi Arabians with knee osteoarthritis

Introduction: The impact of knee osteoarthritis (OA) on physical activities of daily life was studied extensively among the elderly across the globe but not well understood in the Saudi Arabian populace with cultural consideration. This paper assessed the association between knee flexion range of motion (ROM) and ritual physical activities among elderly males due to knee OA.Methods: A cross-sectional study with a sample of 139 males aged 56–74 years diagnosed with knee OA recruited at prayer places. The subjective evaluation was carried using a disease-specific Arabic knee physical functional questionnaire Knee injury and OA Outcome Score-Physical Function Short form (KOOS-PS), and the anthropometric measure of knee flexion ROM was objectively measured by a manual goniometer.Results: The mean and standard deviation of the study sample age, height, weight, and body mass index were 66.9 ± 4.09 years, 158.4 ± 6.1 cm, 74.6 ± 7.1 kg, and 29.6 ± 1.9 kg/m2, respectively. The mean, standard deviation and median of the knee flexion ROM and Arabic-KOOS-PS Questionnaire score were 100.7 ± 7.9, 101.5 and 12.9 ± 13.7, 13.4. The non-parametric Spearman correlation coefficient between the knee stiffness and KOOS-PS physical activities resulted very strong positively correlation, r = 0.967.Conclusion: A strong positive correlation has been found between hidden knee disability and ritual physical activities among male cohorts in Saudi cultural community with knee OA

Is Patient Satisfaction After Total Knee Arthroplasty Predictable Using Patient Characteristics and Preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes?

BackgroundDissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains a difficult problem. Patient characteristics and preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are potential predictors of satisfaction one year after TKA. Being able to predict the outcome preoperatively might reduce the number of less satisfied patients. MethodsA retrospective cohort study on prospectively collected data of 1239 primary TKA patients (ASA I-II, BMI <35) was performed. Primary outcome was degree of patient satisfaction one year after TKA (Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) 0-10). Secondary outcomes were degree of patient satisfaction six months and two years after TKA and being dissatisfied (NRS 0-6) or satisfied (NRS 7-10) at all three time points. Multivariate linear and binary logistic regression analyses were executed with patient characteristics and preoperative PROs as potential predictors. ResultsOne year after TKA, median NRS satisfaction score was 9.0 (8.0-10.0) and 1117 (90.2%) patients were satisfied. BMI, degree of medial cartilage damage, previous knee surgery, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short Form score, EQ VAS score, and anxiety were identified as predictors of the degree of patient satisfaction (P = .000, R2 = 0.027). Models on secondary outcomes reported R2 of 1.7%-7.1% (P < .05). All models showed bad agreement between observed and predicted values for lower NRS satisfaction scores and being dissatisfied. ConclusionThe degree of patient satisfaction and the chance of being dissatisfied or satisfied six months, one, and two years after TKA are predictable by patient characteristics and preoperative PROs but not at a reliability level that is clinically useful.

For Intramedullary Nailing of Femoral Shaft Fractures, Talon Fixation is Helpful to Cope With the Troublesome Distal Locking, But Conventional Distal Locking With Screws Offers a More Stable Construct. Talon Femoral Nail Versus Conventional Femoral Nail

A novel-design femoral nail (FN) with distal talon deployment (Talon-FN) has emerged in the market to cope with problematic distal locking. We aimed to compare the radiological and functional outcomes of the Talon-FN with a conventional FN (Con-FN) for the treatment of femoral shaft fracture (FSFs). This retrospective study included 85 patients (57 men, 28 women; mean age: 46.8±23.9 years) with FSFs (AO types 32-A and B) who were treated with FNs (Talon-FN: 41, Con-FN: 44) during October 2014-2018. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Shortform, Hip injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Shortform, Short musculoskeletal function assessment bother and dysfunction indexes were used for functional assessment. The mean follow-up time was 25.8±6.7 months. The complication rates were 19.6% and 20.5% for Talon-FN and Con-FN, respectively (p=0.92). Malunion was the most common complication for each FN type (Talon-FN: 9.8%, Con-FN: 9.1%). All of the Talon-FN group's malunions were axial (shortening and malrotation) and happened gradually. In contrast, the Con-FN group's malu-nions were angular (varus and valgus) and caused by initial malreduction. The Talon-FN group's two patients with shortening (4.9%) had AO 32-B type fractures, and the other two with malrotation (4.9%) had AO 32-A3 type fractures, all of four fractures were localized distal to the femoral isthmus. The post-operative functional outcomes were similar between the groups (all p>0.05). The mean op-eration/fluoroscopy time and the mean blood loss were lower in the Talon-FN group, while the mean union time was shorter in the Con-FN group (all p<0.01). No nonunion was noted in either group. The reoperation rates were similar at approximately 5% (p=0.95). Our study results revealed that the Talon-FN shortens the operation/fluoroscopy time and decreases the intra-operative blood loss with similar functional outcomes. However, the Con-FN seems to offer a more stable construct against axial malunion with a shorter bone union time. The Talon-FN should not be used in FSFs distal to the femoral isthmus with certain types of fractures prone to shortening and malrotation.