To investigate the experience and emotional impact of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) on orthopaedic surgeons and identify holistic strategies to improve the management of PJI and protect surgeons’ wellbeing. In total, 18 prosthetic joint surgeons in Sweden were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. Content analysis was performed on transcripts of individual in-person interviews conducted between December 2017 and February 2018.Aims
Methods
The routine use of patient reported outcome measures
(PROMs) in evaluating the outcome after arthroplasty by healthcare
organisations reflects a growing recognition of the importance of
patients’ perspectives in improving treatment. Although widely embraced
in the NHS, there are concerns that PROMs are being used beyond
their means due to a poor understanding of their limitations. This paper reviews some of the current challenges in using PROMs
to evaluate total knee arthroplasty. It highlights alternative methods
that have been used to improve the assessment of outcome. Cite this article:
The responsiveness of the Manchester–Oxford Foot
Questionnaire (MOXFQ) was compared with foot/ankle-specific and
generic outcome measures used to assess all surgery of the foot
and ankle. We recruited 671 consecutive adult patients awaiting
foot or ankle surgery, of whom 427 (63.6%) were female, with a mean
age of 52.8 years (18 to 89). They independently completed the MOXFQ,
Short-Form 36 (SF-36) and EuroQol (EQ-5D) questionnaires pre-operatively
and at a mean of nine months (3.8 to 14.4) post-operatively. Foot/ankle
surgeons assessed American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS)
scores corresponding to four foot/ankle regions. A transition item measured
perceived changes in foot/ankle problems post-surgery. Of 628 eligible
patients proceeding to surgery, 491 (78%) completed questionnaires
and 262 (42%) received clinical assessments both pre- and post-operatively. The
regions receiving surgery were: multiple/whole foot in eight (1.3%),
ankle/hindfoot in 292 (46.5%), mid-foot in 21 (3.3%), hallux in
196 (31.2%), and lesser toes in 111 (17.7%). Foot/ankle-specific
MOXFQ, AOFAS and EQ-5D domains produced larger effect sizes (>
0.8)
than any SF-36 domains, suggesting superior responsiveness. In analyses
that anchored change in scores and effect sizes to patients’ responses
to a transition item about their foot/ankle problems, the MOXFQ
performed well. The SF-36 and EQ-5D performed poorly. Similar analyses,
conducted within foot-region based sub-groups of patients, found
that the responsiveness of the MOXFQ was good compared with the
AOFAS. This evidence supports the MOXFQ’s suitability for assessing
all foot and ankle surgery.
We developed a questionnaire to assess patient-reported outcome after surgery of the elbow from interviews with patients. Initially, 17 possible items with five response options were included. A prospective study of 104 patients (107 elbow operations) was carried out to analyse the underlying factor structure, dimensionality, internal and test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the questionnaire items. This was compared with the Mayo Elbow performance score clinical scale, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and the Short-Form (SF-36) General Health Survey. In total, five questions were considered inappropriate, which resulted in the final 12-item questionnaire, which has been referred to as the Oxford elbow score. This comprises three unidimensional domains, ‘elbow function’, ‘pain’ and ‘social-psychological’; with each domain comprising four items with good measurement properties. This new 12-item Oxford elbow score is a valid measure of the outcome of surgery of the elbow.
