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

Routinely collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been useful to quantify and quality-assess provision of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the UK for the past decade. This study aimed to explore whether the outcome following primary THA and TKA had improved over the past seven years.

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine satisfaction rates after hip and knee arthroplasty in patients who did not respond to postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), characteristics of non-responders, and contact preferences to maximize response rates.

Aims

To determine the trajectories of patient reported pain and functional disability over five years following total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Aims

To investigate factors that contribute to patient decisions regarding attendance for arthroplasty during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aims

Up to one in five patients undergoing primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA) require contralateral surgery. This is frequently performed as a staged procedure. This study aimed to determine if outcomes, as determined by the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Knee Score (OKS) differed following second-side surgery.

Aims

The Exeter V40 cemented femoral stem was first introduced in 2000. The largest single-centre analysis of this implant to date was published in 2018 by Westerman et al. Excellent results were reported at a minimum of ten years for the first 540 cases performed at the designer centre in the Exeter NHS Trust, with stem survivorship of 96.8%. The aim of this current study is to report long-term outcomes and survivorship for the Exeter V40 stem in a non-designer centre.

Aims

The EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire is a widely used multiattribute general health questionnaire where an EQ-5D < 0 defines a state ‘worse than death’ (WTD). The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of patients awaiting total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in a health state WTD and to identify associations with this state. Secondary aims were to examine the effect of WTD status on one-year outcomes.

Aims

To calculate how the likelihood of obtaining measurable benefit from hip or knee arthroplasty varies with preoperative patient-reported scores.

Aims

To validate the English language Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) as a tool to evaluate the outcome of hip and knee arthroplasty in a United Kingdom population.

Objectives

To assess the responsiveness and ceiling/floor effects of the Forgotten Joint Score -12 and to compare these with that of the more widely used Oxford Hip Score (OHS) in patients six and 12 months after primary total hip arthroplasty.

Satisfaction with care is important to both patients and to those who pay for it. The Net Promoter Score (NPS), widely used in the service industries, has been introduced into the NHS as the ‘friends and family test’; an overarching measure of patient satisfaction. It assesses the likelihood of the patient recommending the healthcare received to another, and is seen as a discriminator of healthcare performance. We prospectively assessed 6186 individuals undergoing primary lower limb joint replacement at a single university hospital to determine the Net Promoter Score for joint replacements and to evaluate which factors contributed to the response.

Achieving pain relief (odds ratio (OR) 2.13, confidence interval (CI) 1.83 to 2.49), the meeting of pre-operative expectation (OR 2.57, CI 2.24 to 2.97), and the hospital experience (OR 2.33, CI 2.03 to 2.68) are the domains that explain whether a patient would recommend joint replacement services. These three factors, combined with the type of surgery undertaken (OR 2.31, CI 1.68 to 3.17), drove a predictive model that was able to explain 95% of the variation in the patient’s recommendation response. Though intuitively similar, this ‘recommendation’ metric was found to be materially different to satisfaction responses. The difference between THR (NPS 71) and TKR (NPS 49) suggests that no overarching score for a department should be used without an adjustment for case mix. However, the Net Promoter Score does measure a further important dimension to our existing metrics: the patient experience of healthcare delivery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:622–8.

If patients could recall their physical status before total hip (THA) or knee arthroplasty (TKA) accurately it could have valuable applications both clinically and for research. This study evaluated the accuracy of a patient’s recollection one year after either THA or TKA using the Oxford hip or knee scores (OHS and OKS). In total, 113 patients (59 THA, 54 TKA) who had completed the appropriate score pre-operatively were asked to complete the score again at a mean of 12.4 months (standard deviation (sd) 0.8) after surgery, recalling their pre-operative state.

While there were no significant differences between the actual and recalled pre-operative scores (OHS mean difference 0.8, sd 6.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.82 to 2.42, p = 0.329; OKS mean difference -0.11, sd 7.34, 95% CI -2.11 to 1.89, p = 0.912), absolute differences were relatively large (OHS, 5.24; OKS, 5.41), correlation was weak (OHS r = 0.7, OKS r = 0.61) and agreement between actual and recalled responses for individual questions was poor in half of the OHS and two thirds of the OKS.

A patient’s recollection of pre-operative pain and function is inaccurate one year after THA or TKA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1070–5.

Objectives

Patient function after arthroplasty should ideally quickly improve. It is not known which peri-operative function assessments predict length of stay (LOS) and short-term functional recovery. The objective of this study was to identify peri-operative functions assessments predictive of hospital LOS and short-term function after hospital discharge in hip or knee arthroplasty patients.

Objectives

The Oxford Hip and Knee Scores (OHS, OKS) have been demonstrated to vary according to age and gender, making it difficult to compare results in cohorts with different demographics. The aim of this paper was to calculate reference values for different patient groups and highlight the concept of normative reference data to contextualise an individual’s outcome.