Abstract. Introduction. Minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) are critical to understanding changes in patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). The usage and adoption of MCIDs not been well-studied. This study was performed to IDENTIFY trends in PROM and MCID use after TJA over the past decade. Methods. All articles published in the calendar years of 2010 and 2020 in CORR, JBJS, and the Journal of Arthroplasty were reviewed. Articles relating to clinical outcomes in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were included. For each article, all reported PROMs and (if present) accompanying MCIDs were recorded. The use of PROMs and MCIDs were compared between articles published in 2010 and 2020. Results. Overall, 263 articles from 2010 and 546 articles from 2020 were included. The total number of articles reporting any PROM after THA and TKA increased from 131 in 2010 to 194 in 2020, but the proportion of articles reporting PROMs decreased from 49.8% (131/263) to 35.5% (194/546). Both the total number and proportion of articles reporting MCIDs increased from 2.3% (3/131) in 2010 to 16.5% (32/194) in 2020. These trends persisted when analyzing THA and TKA articles individually. Conclusions. Both the absolute number and proportion of articles reporting MCIDs in conjunction with PROMs after TJA has increased in the past decade but remains low. We recommend that journal editors and meeting organizers encourage the inclusion of MCID information in all reports on clinical outcomes after joint replacement

Identification of patients at risk of not achieving minimally clinically important differences (MCID) in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) is important to ensure principled and informed pre-operative decision making. Machine learning techniques may enable the generation of a predictive model for attainment of MCID in hip arthroscopy. Aims: 1) to determine whether machine learning techniques could predict which patients will achieve MCID in the iHOT-12 PROM 6 months after arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), 2) to determine which factors contribute to their predictive power. Data from the UK Non-Arthroplasty Hip Registry database was utilised. We identified 1917 patients who had undergone hip arthroscopy for FAI with both baseline and 6 month follow up iHOT-12 and baseline EQ-5D scores. We trained three established machine learning algorithms on our dataset to predict an outcome of iHOT-12 MCID improvement at 6 months given baseline characteristics including demographic factors, disease characteristics and PROMs. Performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) statistics with 5-fold cross validation. The three machine learning algorithms showed quite different performance. The linear logistic regression model achieved AUROC = 0.59, the deep neural network achieved AUROC = 0.82, while a random forest model had the best predictive performance with AUROC 0.87. Of demographic factors, we found that BMI and age were key predictors for this model. We also found that removing all features except baseline responses to the iHOT-12 questionnaire had little effect on performance for the random forest model (AUROC = 0.85). Disease characteristics had little effect on model performance. Machine learning models are able to predict with good accuracy 6-month post-operative MCID attainment in patients undergoing arthroscopic management for FAI. Baseline scores from the iHOT-12 questionnaire are sufficient to predict with good accuracy whether a patient is likely to reach MCID in post-operative PROMs

The aim of the this study was to determine the effect of the knee flexion angle (KFA) during tibial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft fixation on patient reported outcomes, graft stability, extension loss and re-operation following anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction. All 169 included patients (mean age 28.5 years, 65% male) were treated with anatomic single bundle ACL reconstruction using patellar tendon autograft and randomized to tibial fixation of the ACL graft at either 0o (n=85) or 30o (n=84). The primary outcome was the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) two years following surgery. Secondary outcomes were the Marx Activity Scale (MAS), the rate of re-operation, and physical exam findings at one year including KT-1000 and side to side differences in knee extension. The follow-up rate was 82% (n=139) for the primary outcome. Graft failure rate at two years was 1% (n=2, 1 per group). ACL tibial graft fixation at 0o or 30o did not have a significant effect on KOOS scores at two years following ACLR. Patients whose graft was fixed at a knee flexion angle of 0o had greater scores on the Marx Activity Scale (mean 9.6 [95%CI 8.5-10.6] versus 8.0 [95%CI 6.9-9.1, p=0.04) and a greater proportion of patients who achieved the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for the KOOS pain subscale (94% vs 81%, p=0.04). There was no significant difference in knee extension loss, KT-1000 measurements or re-operation between the two groups. In the setting of anatomic single-bundle ACLR using patellar tendon autograft and anteromedial portal femoral drilling, there was no difference in KOOS scores among patients fixed at 0o and 30o. Patient fixed in full extension did demonstrate higher activity scores at 2 years following surgery and a greater likelihood of achieving the MCID for KOOS pain

Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) in the scores of patient-reported outcome measures allow clinicians to assess the outcome of intervention from the perspective of the patient. There has been significant variation in their absolute values in previous publications and a lack of consistency in their calculation. The purpose of this study was first, to establish whether these values, following spinal surgery, vary depending on the surgical intervention and their method of calculation and secondly, to assess whether there is any correlation between the two external anchors most frequently used to calculate the MCID. . We carried out a retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data of adult patients who underwent elective spinal surgery between 1994 and 2009. A total of 244 patients were included. There were 125 men and 119 women with a mean age of 54 years (16 to 84); the mean follow-up was 62 months (6 to 199) The MCID was calculated using three previously published methods. Our results show that the value of the MCID varies considerably with the operation and its method of calculation. There was good correlation between the two external anchors. The global outcome tool correlated significantly better. We conclude that consensus needs to be reached on the best method of calculating the MCID. This then needs to be defined for each spinal procedure. Using a blanket value for the MCID for all spinal procedures should be avoided. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:366–71

Aims

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) tool designed to assess artificial prosthesis awareness during daily activities following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) is the minimum cut-off value that corresponds to a patient’s satisfactory state-of-health. Despite the validity and reliability of the FJS-12 having been previously demonstrated, the PASS has yet to be clearly defined. This study aims to define the PASS of the FJS-12 following primary THA.

Aims. The aims of this study were to validate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores following arthroscopic Bankart repair, and to identify preoperative threshold values of these scores that could predict the achievement of MCID and PASS. Methods. A retrospective review was conducted on 131 consecutive patients with anterior shoulder instability who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair between January 2020 and January 2023. Inclusion criteria required at least one episode of shoulder instability and a minimum follow-up period of 12 months. Preoperative and one-year postoperative scores were assessed. MCID and PASS were estimated using distribution-based and anchor-based methods, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined preoperative patient-reported outcome measure thresholds predictive of achieving MCID and PASS. Results. MCID thresholds were determined as 169.6, 6.8, 7.2, and 1.1 for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS, respectively. PASS thresholds were calculated as ≤ 480, ≥ 80, ≥ 87, and ≤ 1 for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS, respectively. Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 760 (WOSI) and ≤ 50 (Rowe) predicted achieving MCID for WOSI score (p < 0.001). Preoperative thresholds of ≤ 60 (ASES) and ≥ 2 (VAS) predicted achieving MCID for VAS score (p < 0.001). A preoperative threshold of ≥ 40 (Rowe) predicted achieving PASS for Rowe score (p = 0.005). Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 50 (ASES; p = 0.002) and ≤ 2 (VAS; p < 0.001) predicted achieving PASS for the ASES score. Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 43 (ASES; p = 0.046) and ≤ 4 (VAS; p = 0.024) predicted achieving PASS for the VAS. Conclusion. This study defined MCID and PASS values for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS scores in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. Higher preoperative functional scores may reduce the likelihood of achieving MCID but increase the likelihood of achieving the PASS. These findings provide valuable guidance for surgeons to counsel patients realistically regarding their expectations. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1118–1124

Aims. This study aimed to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) under distribution- and anchor-based methods for the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and range of movement (ROM) after open elbow arthrolysis (OEA). We also assessed the proportion of patients who achieved MCID and SCB; and identified the factors associated with achieving MCID. Methods. A cohort of 265 patients treated by OEA were included. The MEPI and ROM were evaluated at baseline and at two-year follow-up. Distribution-based MDC was calculated with confidence intervals (CIs) reflecting 80% (MDC 80), 90% (MDC 90), and 95% (MDC 95) certainty, and MCID with changes from baseline to follow-up. Anchor-based MCID (anchored to somewhat satisfied) and SCB (very satisfied) were calculated using a five-level Likert satisfaction scale. Multivariate logistic regression of factors affecting MCID achievement was performed. Results. The MDC increased substantially based on selected CIs (MDC 80, MDC 90, and MDC 95), ranging from 5.0 to 7.6 points for the MEPI, and from 8.2° to 12.5° for ROM. The MCID of the MEPI were 8.3 points under distribution-based and 12.2 points under anchor-based methods; distribution- and anchor-based MCID of ROM were 14.1° and 25.0°. The SCB of the MEPI and ROM were 17.3 points and 43.4°, respectively. The proportion of the patients who attained anchor-based MCID for the MEPI and ROM were 74.0% and 94.7%, respectively; furthermore, 64.2% and 86.8% attained SCB. Non-dominant arm (p = 0.022), higher preoperative MEPI rating (p < 0.001), and postoperative visual analogue scale pain score (p < 0.001) were independent predictors of not achieving MCID for the MEPI, while atraumatic causes (p = 0.040) and higher preoperative ROM (p = 0.005) were independent risk factors for ROM. Conclusion. In patients undergoing OEA, the MCID for the increased MEPI is 12.2 points and 25° increased ROM. The SCB is 17.3 points and 43.3°, respectively. Future studies using the MEPI and ROM to assess OEA outcomes should report not only statistical significance but also clinical importance. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):366–372

Utility score is a preference-based measure of general health state – where 0 is equal to death, and 1 is equal to perfect health. To understand a patient's smallest perceptible change in utility score, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) can be calculated. However, there are multiple methods to calculate MCID with no consensus about which method is most appropriate. The aim of this study is to calculate MCID values for the Veterans-RAND 12 (VR12) utility score using varying methods. Our hypothesis is that different methods will yield different MCID values. A tertiary institutional registry (SMART) was used as the study cohort. Patients who underwent unilateral TKA for osteoarthritis from January 2012 to January 2020 were included. Utility score was calculated from VR12 responses using the standardised Brazier's method. Distribution and anchor methods were used for the MCID calculation. For distribution methods, 0.5 standard deviations of the baseline and change scores were used. For anchor methods, the physical and emotional anchor questions in the VR12 survey were used to benchmark utility score outcomes. Anchor methods included mean difference in change score, mean difference in 12 month score, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis with the Youden index. Complete case analysis of 1735 out of 1809 eligible patients was performed. Significant variation in the MCID estimates for VR12 utility score were reported dependent on the calculation method used. The MCID estimate from 0.5 standard deviations of the change score was 0.083. The MCID estimate from the ROC analysis method using physical or emotional anchor question improvement was 0.115 (CI95 0.08-0.14; AUC 0.656). Different MCID calculation methods yielded different MCID values. Our results suggest that MCID is not an umbrella concept but rather many distinct concepts. A general consensus is required to standardise how MCID is defined, calculated, and applied in clinical practice

MCID and PASS are thresholds driven from PROMS to reflect clinical effectiveness. Statistical significance can be derived from a change in PROMS, whereas MCID and PASS reflect clinical significance. Its role has been increasingly used in the world of young adult hip surgery with several publications determining the thresholds for Femoro-acetabular impingement FAI. To our knowledge MCID and PASS for patient undergoing PAO for dysplasia has not been reported. 593 PAOs between 1/2013 and 7/2023 were extracted from the Northumbria Hip Preservation Registry. Patients with available PROMS at 1year and/or 2years were included. PAOs for retroversion, residual Perthes and those combined with FO were excluded. MCID was calculated using the distribution method 0.5SD of baseline score(1). PASS was calculated using anchor method, ROC analysis performed, and value picked maximizing Youden index. A Logistic Regression analysis was performed to determine which independent variables correlated with achieving MCID and PASS. The MCID threshold for iHOt12 was 8.6 with 83.4 and 86.3 % of patients achieved it at 1 and 2 years respectively. The PASS score at 1 and 2 year follow up was 43 and 44 respectively, with 72.6 and 75.2% achieving it at 1 and 2 year postop. At 2 years a Higher preop iHOT 12 was associated with not achieving MCID and PASS (p<0.05). Preop acetabular version was negatively correlated with achieving MCID and previous hip arthroscopy was negatively correlated with PASS. The % of patients achieving MCID and PASS mimics that of FAI surgery (2). The negative correlation with preop iHOT12 reaffirms the importance of patient selection. The negative correlation of hip arthroscopy highlights the importance of having a high index of suspicion for dysplasia prior to hip arthroscopy and poorer outcomes of patients with mixed CAM and dysplasia pathology

Femoroacetabular Impingement (FAI) syndrome, characterised by abnormal hip contact causing symptoms and osteoarthritis, is measured using the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT). This study uses machine learning to predict patient outcomes post-treatment for FAI, focusing on achieving a minimally clinically important difference (MCID) at 52 weeks. A retrospective analysis of 6133 patients from the NAHR who underwent hip arthroscopic treatment for FAI between November 2013 and March 2022 was conducted. MCID was defined as half a standard deviation (13.61) from the mean change in iHOT score at 12 months. SKLearn Maximum Absolute Scaler and Logistic Regression were applied to predict achieving MCID, using baseline and 6-month follow-up data. The model's performance was evaluated by accuracy, area under the curve, and recall, using pre-operative and up to 6-month postoperative variables. A total of 23.1% (1422) of patients completed both baseline and 1-year follow-up iHOT surveys. The best results were obtained using both pre and postoperative variables. The machine learning model achieved 88.1% balanced accuracy, 89.6% recall, and 92.3% AUC. Sensitivity was 83.7% and specificity 93.5%. Key variables determining outcomes included MCID achievement at 6 months, baseline iHOT score, 6-month iHOT scores for pain, and difficulty in walking or using stairs. The study confirmed the utility of machine learning in predicting long-term outcomes following arthroscopic treatment for FAI. MCID, based on the iHOT 12 tools, indicates meaningful clinical changes. Machine learning demonstrated high accuracy and recall in distinguishing between patients achieving MCID and those who did not. This approach could help early identification of patients at risk of not meeting the MCID threshold one year after treatment

Aims. A substantial fraction of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty (KA) or hip arthroplasty (HA) do not achieve an improvement as high as the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), i.e. do not achieve a meaningful improvement. Using three patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), our aim was: 1) to assess machine learning (ML), the simple pre-surgery PROM score, and logistic-regression (LR)-derived performance in their prediction of whether patients undergoing HA or KA achieve an improvement as high or higher than a calculated MCID; and 2) to test whether ML is able to outperform LR or pre-surgery PROM scores in predictive performance. Methods. MCIDs were derived using the change difference method in a sample of 1,843 HA and 1,546 KA patients. An artificial neural network, a gradient boosting machine, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, ridge regression, elastic net, random forest, LR, and pre-surgery PROM scores were applied to predict MCID for the following PROMs: EuroQol five-dimension, five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L), EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS), 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). Results. Predictive performance of the best models per outcome ranged from 0.71 for HOOS-PS to 0.84 for EQ-VAS (HA sample). ML statistically significantly outperformed LR and pre-surgery PROM scores in two out of six cases. Conclusion. MCIDs can be predicted with reasonable performance. ML was able to outperform traditional methods, although only in a minority of cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(9):512–521

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal important change (MIC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) in the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) according to patient satisfaction six months following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in a UK population. Methods. During a one-year period, 461 patients underwent a primary THA and completed preoperative and six-month FJS, with a mean age of 67.2 years (22 to 93). At six months, patient satisfaction was recorded as very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. The difference between patients recording neutral (n = 31) and satisfied (n = 101) was used to define the MCID. MIC for a cohort was defined as the change in the FJS for those patients declaring their outcome as satisfied, whereas receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the MIC for an individual and the PASS. Distribution-based methodology was used to calculate the MDC. Results. Using satisfaction as the anchor, the MCID for the FJS was 8.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7 to 15.9; p = 0.040), which was affirmed when adjusting for confounding. The MIC for the FJS for a cohort of patients was 17.7 (95% CI 13.7 to 21.7) and for an individual patient was 18. The MDC90 for the FJS was eight, meaning that 90% of patients scoring more than this will have experienced a real change that is beyond measurement error. The PASS threshold for the FJS was defined as 29. Conclusion. The MCID and MIC can be used respectively to assess whether there is a clinical difference between two groups, or whether a cohort or patient has had a meaningful change in their FJS. Both values were greater than measurement error (MDC90), suggesting a real change. The PASS threshold for the postoperative FJS can be used as a marker of achieving patient satisfaction following THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1759–1765

Aims. Acetabular fractures are associated with long-term morbidity. Our prospective cohort study sought to understand the recovery trajectory of this injury over five years. Methods. Eligible patients at a level I trauma centre were recruited into a longitudinal registry of surgical acetabular fractures between June 2004 and August 2019. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS), were recorded at baseline pre-injury recall and six months, one year, two years, and five years postoperatively. Comparative analyses were performed for elementary and associated fracture patterns. The proportion of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was determined. The rate of, and time to, conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) was also established. Results. We recruited 251 patients (253 fractures), with a 4:1 male to female ratio and mean age of 46.1 years (SD 16.4). Associated fracture patterns accounted for 56.5% of fractures (n = 143). Trajectory analysis showed all timepoints had significant disability versus baseline, including final follow-up (p < 0.001). Elementary fractures had higher SF-36 PCS at six months (p = 0.023) and one year (p = 0.007) compared to associated fractures, but not at two years (p = 0.135) or five years (p = 0.631). The MCID in SF-36 PCS was observed in 37.3% of patients (69/185) between six months and one year, 26.9% of patients (39/145) between one and two years, and 23.3% of patients (20/86) between two and five years, highlighting the long recovery potential of these injuries. A significant proportion of patients failed to attain the MCID after five years (38.1%; 40/105). Conversion to THA occurred in 13.1% of patients (11/110 elementary and 22/143 associated fractures). Approximately two-thirds of THAs (21/33 patients; 63.6%) were performed within two years of index surgery. Conclusion. Acetabular fractures significantly impact physical function. Recovery trajectory is often elongated beyond one year, with two-thirds of our patients displaying persistent clinically relevant long-term disability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(1):69–76

To evaluate the impact of routine capsular repair on patient-reported outcomes, survivorship and achievability of clinically important improvement, minimum 5-years post-surgery. Our prospective institutional registry was reviewed for cases undergoing primary HA for FAI, and stratified into two groups depending on whether the capsule was repaired or not. Routine repair was introduced in late 2013. The No Repair group consisted of patients undergoing HA between Jan 2010-June 2013 while the Repair group consisted of patients undergoing HA between Jan 2015-Sept 2018. Exclusion criteria consisted of >50 years, Tonnis>1, dysplasia(LCEA<25), concomitant hip pathologies. PROMs consisted of mHHS, SF36 and UCLA. Metrics of clinically important improvement was evaluated using MCID and SCB. Rates of repeat HA or THA conversion were recorded. 985 cases were included (359 No Repair; 626 Repair), 86% male, average age 27.4±6.7years. Significant improvement in all PROMs at minimum 5-years was observed for both groups (p<0.001 for all; large effect sizes for mHHS and SF36, medium effect sizes for UCLA). At 5-years post-op there was no significant difference between groups for mHHS(p=0.078) or UCLA(0.794). SF36 was significantly poorer for those cases undergoing routine repair(p<0.001) however effect size was small (0.20). Thresholds of MCID and SCB were calculated as 69% and 86% for mHHS, 64% and 77% for UCLA, 43% and 60% for SF36. Both groups achieved MCID and SCB at similar rates for mHHS and UCLA. A significantly lower proportion of cases in the repair groups achieved MCID for SF36 (53.6% vs 63.5%, p=0.034) and SCB for SF36 (37.3% vs 52.8%, p<0.001). No significant difference between groups for THA conversion (0.6% No Repair vs 0.5% Repair) or repeat HA (9.7% No Repair vs 8.1% Repair). Routinely repairing the capsule following HA for FAI demonstrates no clinical benefit over not repairing the capsule 5 years post-surgery

Aims. To identify the responsiveness, minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal clinical important change (MIC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds in the 36-item Short Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) (v2) for each of the eight dimensions and the total score following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. There were 3,321 patients undergoing primary TKA with preoperative and one-year postoperative SF-36 scores. At one-year patients were asked how satisfied they were and “How much did the knee arthroplasty surgery improve the quality of your life?”, which was graded as: great, moderate, little (n = 277), none (n = 98), or worse. Results. Physical function, role limitations due to physical problems (‘role physical’), bodily pain, and the total score SF-36 scores demonstrated the greatest effect sizes (> 0.9). The MCID for each of SF-36 dimensions ranged from 1.7 for role emotional to 6.4 for bodily pain. The MICs for a cohort of patients ranged from -1.0 for general health to 11.1 for bodily pain. The MICs for an individual patient were marginally greater (one to two points) compared to those for a cohort, and ranging from 0.0 for general and mental health to 13.5 for physical function. The lowest PASS score threshold was associated with physical function (> 34 points) whereas the greatest threshold (> 69 points) was associated with mental health. Conclusion. The SF-36 is a responsive tool, and the estimates for MCID, MIC, and PASS thresholds that can be used to power studies, assess whether there has been a meaningful change in patients’ health-related quality of life, and can be used as a marker of achieving patient satisfaction following TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(7):477–483

Young patients undergoing THA or hip used. HOS and iHOT33 have demonstrated to be useful in hip preservation surgery but never used in THA. The aim of the study was to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes with HOS and iHOT33 in hip arthroscopy and THA. We conducted a retrospective study with prospective data collection of 118 consecutive young patients (<65 y.o.) between 2008 to 2012 who underwent hip arthroscopy or THA. The mean follow-up was 12.05 years. All surgeries were done by the same senior surgeon. PROMs used were iHOT-33 and HOS preoperatively, at one year and 10 years. SPSS Statistics Grad Pack 28.0 software was used for statistical analysis. Arthroscopy Group (57 patients): Mean age 35.36 years. 55.93% were male. iHOT33 mean differential improvement was 24.43 at 1 year, 70,17% exceed MCID and 49,1% SCB. HOS mean differential improvement was 16.26 at one year. 54,38 % patients exceed MCID and 49,36% SCB. At 10 years, iHOT33 mean differential improvement was 14,36 and 12.56 for HOS. Regarding complications, 3 patients underwent THA (5.26%) and 10 (17.54%) continued with groin pain. THA Group (61 patients): Mean age 52,54 years. 55.73% were male. Cementless THA was used in all patients with ceramic on ceramic used in 77%. iHOT33 mean differential improvement was 41,57 at 1 year. 95,08% patients exceed MCID and 85,25% SCB. HOS mean differential improvement was 16.57 points at one year. 85,25% patients exceed MCID and 81,97% SCB. At 10 years, iHOT33 mean differential improvement was 20,15 and 14.12 for HOS. Regarding complications, 1 patient underwent DAIR for infection (1.64%) and 1 dislocation with close reduction (1.64%). iHOT33 or HOS scores should be considered to be used in young active patients after hip preserving surgery or THA, with more predictable results at long-term in THA group

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal important change (MIC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) threshold in the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) according to patient satisfaction six months following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. During a one-year period 484 patients underwent a primary TKA and completed preoperative and six-month FJS and OKS. At six months patients were asked, “How satisfied are you with your operated knee?” Their response was recorded as: very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. The difference between patients recording neutral (n = 44) and satisfied (n = 153) was used to define the MCID. MIC for a cohort was defined as the change in the FJS for those patients declaring their outcome as satisfied, whereas receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the MIC for an individual and the PASS threshold. Distribution-based methodology was used to calculate the MDC. Results. Using satisfaction as the anchor question, the MCID for the FJS was 16.6 (95% confidence interval (CIs) 8.9 to 24.3; p < 0.001) and when adjusting for confounding this decreased to 13.7 points (95% CI 4.8 to 22.5; p < 0.001). The MIC for the FJS for a cohort of patients was 17.7 points and for an individual patient was 10 points. The MDC90 for the FGS was 12 points; where 90% of patients scoring more than this will have experienced a real change that is beyond measurement error. The PASS was defined as 22 points or more in the postoperative FJS. Conclusion. The estimates for MCID and MIC can be used to assess whether there is clinical difference between two groups and whether a cohort/patient has had a meaningful change in their FJS, respectively. The MDC90 of 12 points suggests a value lower than this may fall within measurement error. A postoperative FJS of 22 or more was predictive of achieving PASS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):846–854

The results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) revisions to correct leg length discrepancy (LLD) are not clear, with only two former limited series (< 25 patients). Therefore, we conducted a retrospective study of THA revisions for LLD to determine: 1) the change in LLD, 2) the function outcomes and whether obtaining equal leg lengths influenced function, 3) the complication and survival rates. This multicenter study included 57 patients: 42 THA revisions for limb shortening and 15 revisions for limb lengthening. LLD was measured on conventional radiographs and EOS. The Oxford-12 and FJS outcome scores were collected and the number of patients achieving the Oxford-12 MCID. The revisions were carried out a mean of 2.8 years after the index THA. The median LLD decreased from 7.5 mm (IQR: [5;12]) to 1 mm (IQR: [0.5;2.5]) at follow-up (p=0.0002). Overall, 55 of 57 patients (96%) had < 5 mm LLD at follow-up and 12 patients (21%) had equal leg lengths. The complication rate was 25%: 12 mechanical complications (8 periprosthetic femoral fractures, 2 stem loosening and 1 cup loosening, 1 dislocation) and 1 periprosthetic infection. The patient satisfaction was high with a median FJS of 79.2/100 and 77% of patients reached the Oxford-12 MCID. Lengthening procedures had significantly worst function than shortening (38% vs 91% of patients achieving the Oxford-12 MCID (p=0.0004)). Survivorship was 85% (95% CI: 77.9 – 92.5) at 2 years and 77% (95% CI: 66.3 – 87.1) at 4.6 years when using re-revision for any reason as the endpoint. When LLD after THA does not respond to conservative management, revision THA should be considered. Although revision THA for LLD improved medium-term functional outcomes with a high patient satisfaction rate, especially for shortening procedures, the complication rate was high, particularly related to periprosthetic femoral fracture

There is a limited literature available describing the various diagnostic modalities and treatment options for the management of subspine impingement (SSI). We developed a study to evaluate the clinical improvement at 1 year and 5 years, with iHOT 33 and HOS hip scores. (1) Do patients with subspine compression improve with arthroscopic treatment clinically at short term follow-up (1 year)? (2) Is the improvement maintained in the mid-term (5 years)?. 43 young patients with subspine compression (prominent anterior inferior iliac spine) treated arthroscopically between January 2010 and December 2021 were included. Patients completed the iHOT33, HOS-SPORT and HOS-ADL questionnaires before surgery, 1 year and 5 years follow up. We evaluated pre and postoperative differences at one year and at 5 years. Minimum Clinically Significant Difference (MCID) and the Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB) were used to stablish clinical improvement. Mean age was 37.38 years and 66% were males. Almost 75% and 70% of our patients exceed the MCID and the SCB respectively in all the questionnaires after 1 year-follow up. However, at 5 years-follow up, nearly 70% and 65% of the patients exceeded MCID and SCB respectively. We demonstrate that arthroscopic treatment of subspine impingement as an effective treatment for Subspine impingement. However, it is necessary larger sample size and longer follow up period to analyze the long-term results to demonstrate this treatment as the “gold standard”