Increased collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) in registries enables international comparison of patient-centered outcomes after knee and hip replacement. We aimed to investigate 1) variations in PROM improvement, 2) the possible confounding factor of BMI, and 3) differences in comorbidity distributions between registries. Registries affiliated with the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) or OECD membership countries were invited to report aggregate EQ-5D, OKS, OHS, HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS values. Eligible patients underwent primary total, unilateral knee or hip replacement for osteoarthritis within three years and had completed PROMs preoperatively and either 6 or 12 months postoperatively, excluding patients with subsequent revisions. For each PROM cohort, Chi-square tests were performed for BMI distributions across registries and 12 predefined PROM strata (male/female, age 20-64/65-74/>75, high or low preoperative PROM scores). Comorbidity distributions were reported for available comorbidity indexes. Thirteen registries from 9 countries contributed data, n~130000 knee (range 140 to 79848) and n~113000 hip (range 137 to 85281). Mean EQ-5D index values (10 registries) ranged from 0.53 to 0.71 (knee) and 0.50 to 0.70 (hips) preoperatively and 0.78 to 0.85 (knee) and 0.83 to 0.87 (hip) postoperatively. Mean OKS (6 registries) ranged from 19.3 to 23.6 preoperatively and 36.2 to 41.2 postoperatively. Mean OHS (7 registries) ranged from 18.0 to 23.2 preoperatively and 39.8 to 44.2 postoperatively. Four registries reported KOOS-PS and three reported HOOS-PS. Proportions of patients with BMI >30 ranged from 35 to 62% (10 knee registries) and 16 to 43% (11 hip registries). For both knee and hip registries, distributions of patients across six BMI categories differed significantly among registries (p30 were for patients in the youngest age groups (20 to 64 and 65 to 74 years) with the lowest baseline scores. Additionally, females with lowest preoperative PROM scores had highest BMI. These findings were echoed for the OHS and OKS cohorts. Proportions of patients with ASA scores ≥3 ranged from 7 to 42% (9 knee registries) and 6 to 35% (8 hip registries). PROM-score improvement varies between international registries, which may be partially explained by differences in age, sex and preoperative scores. BMI and comorbidity may be relevant to adjust for.
Patient satisfaction is an important outcome measure after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and is the ultimate goal of surgery. However, patient satisfaction reflects a complex construct of the patient's personal expectations and preferences in addition to subjective evaluation of outcome after TKA. Multiple studies have found a patient dissatisfaction rate of approximately 20% at 1 year after TKA. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is an association between a single-item validated TKA satisfaction score and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 3 time points (1, 2, and 5 years after TKA) and to determine if dissatisfaction rate after TKA varies over time. A multi-center, prospective cohort of 12,952 patients (8,078 patients were assessed at 1-year, 702 patients at 2-year, and 4,172 patients at 5-year) undergoing primary TKA were enrolled by 230 surgeons in 28 states between 2012–2015. Surgeons practices varied in size, reimbursement models, and geographic setting ensuring that the cohort included diverse patient populations and delivery models. Surgeons agreed to invite all TKA patients to participate and sporadic audits of surgical logs validated that all patients were invited and > 90% of patients were included. Demographic and clinical data [age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and modified Charlson co-morbidity index (CCI)] were collected. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected pre-op and post-op at 1, 2, and 5 years using an internet-based platform including the KOOS (total score, and pain, ADL, QoL sub scores), KOOS Jr, SF-36 (PCS and MCS). We used the single-item satisfaction scale which was tested and validated by the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. The patients' responses were made on 5-point Likert scale (very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, very dissatisfied). Patients were classified into 2 categories: satisfied group for patients who answered satisfied or very satisfied and dissatisfied group for patients answered neutral, somewhat dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. Univariate analysis of the difference between the satisfied and dissatisfied patients' groups was performed using Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. Logistic regression model was performed to study the correlation between the satisfaction and PROMs with 95% confidence interval.Introduction
Methods
Several surgical approaches are available for elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis. While posterior surgical approaches are the most common, interest in a direct anterior (Hueter) approach is increasing because of alleged advantages in convalescence. However, no studies have examined differences in patient-reported global and condition-specific measures of health across multiple institutions. The ongoing Pulmonary Embolism Prevention after Hip and Knee Replacement (PEPPER) study is a PCORI-funded multicenter pragmatic clinical trial randomizing patients to three different antithrombotic regimens. We analyzed operative data from PEPPER to compare pre-post changes in validated patient-reported outcome measures after THA based on surgical approach. Participants (age 21 or older) were recruited from 27 academic medical centers for the PEPPER trial. Eligibility screening, baseline measures, and operative detail were entered into a central database with standardized blinded post-operative data collection protocol. We included participants undergoing elective primary total hip arthroplasty, excluding those undergoing revision, resurfacing, bilateral procedures, on chronic preoperative anticoagulation, with a recent history of gastrointestinal, cerebral, or other hemorrhage, defective hemostasis, or uncontrolled hypertension. Participating centers reported the operative approach as “Posterior”, “Transgluteal”, or “Anterior”. The brief version of the Hip Dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS Jr.) and the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Survey (PROMIS10) were ascertained pre-operatively, and at 1, 3 and 6 months post-operatively. Mixed-effects linear regression was used to compare difference in patient-reported outcomes over time based on surgical approach, adjusting for baseline measures of health outcome, patient age, sex, race, ethnicity, BMI, comorbidity, education, work status, alcohol use, and smoking status.Introduction
Methods
CMS is now publicly reporting 30-day readmission rates following total joint replacement (TJR) by hospital and is planning the collection of patient-reported function and pain after TJR. Nationally, 5% of patients are readmitted to the hospital after TJR for both medical and orthopedic-related issues. However, the relationship between readmission and functional gain and pain relief after TJR has not been evaluated. Clinical data on 2990 CMS patients from over 150 surgeons practicing in 22 US states who elected primary unilateral TJR in 2011–2012 were identified. Measures include pre-operative demographics, BMI, medical and musculoskeletal comorbidities, pain and function (KOOS/HOOS; SF36) and 6 month post-TJR pain and function. Data were merged with CMS claims to verify 30-day readmissions. Descriptive statistics and multivariate models adjusted for covariates and clustering within site were performed.Introduction
Methods
For RA patients undergoing TKR, the gain in function at 6 months following surgery is less than that experienced by OA patients; for THR, however, gains are similar in OA and RA patients. Total joint replacement (TJR) is commonly used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and yet little information is available to quantify their functional gain following surgery and how it differs from what the osteoarthritis (OA) population experiences. Therefore, we examined 6-month functional outcomes of TJR in a population-based observational cohort of RA and OA patients who underwent total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement.Summary Statement
Introduction
A prospective randomised evaluation of primary TKA utilizing patient specific instruments demonstrated great accuracy of bone resection, improved sagittal alignment and the potential to improve functional outcomes and reduce operating room costs when compared to standard TKA instrumentation. Patient specific instruments (PSI), an alternative to standard total knee arthroplasty (TKA) technology, have been proposed to improve the accuracy of TKA implant placement and post-operative limb alignment. Previous studies have shown mixed results regarding the effectiveness of PSI. The purposes of this study were (1) to evaluate the accuracy of the pre-operative predicted PSI plan compared to intra-operative TKA resection measurements, (2) to compare patient-reported outcome measures of PSI and standard TKA patients, and (3) to compare the incremental cost savings with PSI.Summary Statement
Introduction
This data may help explain the variability in physical function after primary TKR as compared to primary THR. Total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) reliably relieve pain, restore function, and ensure mobility in patients with advanced joint arthritis; however these results are not uniform across all patient populations. We compared baseline demographic and symptom profiles in patients from a US national cohort undergoing primary TKR and THR.Summary Statement
Introduction
Total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) reliably relieve pain, restore function, and ensure mobility in patients with advanced joint arthritis; however these results are not uniform across all patient populations. Moreover, it is well established that knee replacement patients have outcomes inferior to those undergoing hip replacement procedures with lower rates of dissatisfaction with post-operative function and pain relief. We compared baseline demographic and symptom profiles in patients from a US national cohort undergoing primary TKR and THR to determine whether differences in demographic make-up, pre-operative symptoms, or pre-existing co-morbidities might contribute to these differences observed post-operatively. A cohort of 2375 patients undergoing primary TKR and THR was identified from the FORCE national research consortium from all surgeries performed between July 1st 2011 and March 30th 2012. This set of patients was derived from 120 contributing surgeons in 23 US states. Gathered data included patient demographics, comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index), operative joint pain severity (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC)), physical function (SF-36; Physical Component Score (PCS)), emotional health (SF-36; Mental Component Score (MCS)), and musculoskeletal burden of illness (Hip and Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores; Oswestry Disability Index). Using descriptive statistics, we compared the baseline demographic characteristics and symptom profiles of patients undergoing TKR (n = 1362) and those undergoing THR (n = 1013).Introduction:
Methods:
There is an increasing trend within the US for utilization of total knee replacement for patients who are still of working-age. Numerous causes have been suggested, ranging from greater participation in demanding sporting activities to the epidemic of obesity. A universal concern is that increased arthritis burden will lead to increased disabilty and unsustainable health-care costs both now and in the future with increasing rates of revision surgery in the years ahead. This raises the critical question: Are younger patients receiving knee replacement prematurely? To address this issue, we compared the severity of operative knee pain and functional status in younger versus older TKR patients, drawing upon a national research registry. A cohort of 3314 primary TKR patients was identified from the FORCE national research consortium from all surgeries performed between July 1st 2011 and March 30th 2012. This set of patients was derived from 120 contributing surgeons in 23 US states. Data characterizing each patient undergoing surgery was derived from patients, surgeons and hospitals, and included the SF 36 Physical Component Score (PCS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire. WOMAC scores were also calculated from the KOOS data and transformed to a 0-to-100 scale with lower scores representing worse impairment. Using descriptive statistics, we compared the demographic and baseline characteristics of patients younger than 65 years of age (n = 1326) vs. those 65 years of age and older (n = 1988).Introduction:
Methods:
Arthritis is the most common chronic illness in the United States. TKR provides reliable pain relief and improved function for patients with advanced knee arthritis. Total joint replacement now represents the greatest expense in the national healthcare budget. Surgical costs are driven by two key components: fixed and variable costs. Patient Specific Instruments™ (PSI, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) has the potential to reduce both fixed and variable costs by shortening operative time and reducing surgical instrumentation. However, PSI requires the added costs of pre-operative MRI scanning and fabrication of custom pin guides. Previous studies have shown reduction in operating room times and required instrumentation, but question the cost-effectiveness of the technology. Also, these studies failed to show improvement in coronal alignment, but call for additional studies to determine any improvement in clinical function and patient satisfaction. Our pilot study aims to compare the incremental PSI costs to fixed and variable OR cost savings, and compare meaningful patient and clinical outcomes between PSI and standard TKR surgeries. This IRB approved, prospective, randomized pilot trial involves 20 TKR patients. Inclusion criteria includes: diagnosis of osteoarthritis, ability to undergo MRI, and consent for primary TKR. Following informed consent, patients are randomized to PSI or standard TKR. Patients randomized to PSI undergo pre-operative non-contrast MRI of the affected knee at least 4 weeks prior to surgery. Custom pin guides are prototyped from 3D pre-operative planning software customizable to individual surgeon and patient. All surgeries will be completed by a single surgeon (DA), using a medial parapatellar arthrotomy and Zimmer Nexgen™ implants. Surgical technique for PSI patients utilizes custom pin guides to determine placement of the femoral and tibial cutting guides, whereas an intramedullary femoral rod and extramedullary tibial guide are used in standard TKR patients. Our pilot study will compare numerous intra-operative and post-operative variables between the two patient cohorts. Intra-operative variables include: bony cutting time, tourniquet time, total OR time, surgical instrumentation, and bony resection height. Post-operative variables include: instrument processing and sterilization, blood transfusion, pain medication usage, length of stay, complications (including hospital readmission), and patient reported outcomes (SF-36, WOMAC, and satisfaction) at 4 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Additional economic sensitivity analyses using hospital and national cost-to-charge figures will quantify the potential added revenue or costs of implementing the PSI system.Purpose
Methods
The effect of pre-operative pain, physical function, mental function and multiple patient factors on patient outcome following TKR was examined. After informed consent, 105 patients undergoing primary TKR completed preoperative SF-36 and WOMAC questionnaires and a Knee Society Score (KSS) was determined. These scores were repeated at 12 months. Patient data studied included age, gender, BMI and significant comorbid conditions such as diabetes, cardiac disease, and COPD. Statistical analysis included a univariate analysis, followed by a bivariate analysis and multiple regression analysis. All physical dimensions of the SF-36, WOMAC and KSS showed highly significant improvements after one year. The KSS improved to a mean of 94.8 (p<
0.000001). For patients greater than 65 years of age, postoperative physical function was returned to normative scores for age matched controls. For patients less than 65, physical function did not reach age matched controls even though similar improvements in physical function were seen. Patients with lower physical function scores (PCS) pre-operatively showed greater improvement postoperatively yet did not reach the same absolute level of function as patients who had higher preoperative physical function. The mean PCS for men increased from 35 to 42, while for women it increased from 29 to 42 (p=0.042). Preoperative mental function (MCS) was a strong predictor of postoperative physical function. Patients with low preoperative MCS and one or more comorbid conditions were 10.1 times more likely to have a poor outcome following TKR. Knowledge of preoperative physical function, mental function, gender, age and comorbid conditions improves prediction of post-operative physical function after TKR. Patients at high risk for little improvement following TKR are those with low preoperative mental function (MCS<
50) in addition to one or more comorbid conditions. These patients can be identified during the pre-operative period.