Outcome measures in total hip arthroplasty: have our metrics changed over 15 years?

INTRODUCTION: Consensus has not been reached regarding ideal outcome measures for total hip arthroplasty (THA) clinical evaluation and research. The goal of this review was to analyze the trends in outcome metrics within the THA literature and to discuss the potential impact of instrument heterogeneity on clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PubMed search of all manuscripts related to THA from January 2005 to December 2019 was performed. Statistical and linear regression analyses were performed for individual outcome metrics as a proportion of total THA publications over time. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant increase in studies utilizing outcomes metrics between 2005 and 2019 (15.1-29.5%; P < 0.001; R2 = 98.1%). Within the joint-specific subcategory, use of the Harris Hip Score (HHS) significantly decreased from 2005 to 2019 (82.8-57.3%; P < 0.001), use of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) significantly increased (0-6.7%; P < 0.001), and the modified HHS significantly increased (0-10.5%; P < 0.001). In the quality of life subcategory, EQ-5D demonstrated a significant increase in usage (0-34.8%; P < 0.001), while Short Form-36 significantly decreased (100% vs. 27.3%; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of outcome-reporting metrics in THA has continued to increase, resulting in added complexity within the literature. The utilization rates of individual instruments have shifted over the past 15 years. Additional study is required to determine which specific instruments are recommended.

Outpatient Hip Safety in an Ambulatory Surgery Center Is Independent of Approach.

BACKGROUND: There are few data comparing the direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterior approach (PA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this study is to compare 90-day complications between the 2 approaches. We hypothesized that they would be equally safe and effective. METHODS: Retrospective review identified 432 THAs (346 DAA, 86 PA) performed at a single ambulatory surgery center (ASC). Outcomes compared included demographics, comorbidities, preoperative and discharge pain scores (visual analog scale [VAS]), overall time spent in the ASC, overnight stay, emergency room visits, admission, reoperation, and complications within a 90-day period. RESULTS: There were no differences in mean preoperative VAS (DAA 4.7, PA 4.5), mean discharge VAS (DAA 0.8, PA 0.7), overall time spent in the ASC (DAA 9.0 hours, PA 9.3 hours), total number of overnight stays (DAA 0.9%, PA 1.2%), emergency room visits (DAA 1.7%, PA 1.2%), admissions (DAA 1.4%, PA 1.2%), reoperations (DAA 1.4%, PA 1.2%), or complications (DAA 3.5%, PA 2.3%). CONCLUSION: There were no differences in the safety outcomes, and overall there were few complications in the 90-day period, regardless of the surgeon's preferred approach. This study indicates both DAA and PA are equally safe for THA in the outpatient setting, and the choice of surgical approach should be based on patient and surgeon preference.

Evolving Outcome Measures in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Trends and Utilization Rates Over the Past 15 Years.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome metrics and reporting are important for demonstrating value associated with total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This review studied the patient-reported outcome utilization trends as reported within the TKA literature over a 15-year period. METHODS: A PubMed search of all manuscripts related to TKA from January 2005 to December 2019 was performed. Descriptive statistics were used for individual outcome metrics as proportions of total article publications focusing on TKA outcomes. Linear regressions analysis was performed to demonstrate significant changes in utilization rates over time. RESULTS: There was a significant overall increase in studies utilizing outcome metrics between 2005 and 2019 (16.1%-45.0%; P < .001; R2 = 98.7%). Within joint-specific metrics (2005-2019), use of Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome score increased (0%-14.8%; P < .001); while use of Knee Society Knee Scoring System decreased (55.2%-35.4%; P = .007). Of the studies reporting general health, use of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 decreased (100%-66.7% from 2014 to 2019; P = .006), and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global-10 increased (0%-21.4% from 2005 to 2019; P < .001). In the quality of life subcategory (2005-2019), EuroQol 5-Dimension Health Outcome Survey increased in usage (14.3%-28.0%; P < .001), while Short Form-36 use decreased (85.7%-36.6%; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Although utilization of outcome metrics has significantly increased over the last 15 years in the TKA literature, there still exists considerable heterogeneity of outcome metrics. This lack of consensus may impede comparisons of studies for clinical and research purposes, as well as hinder cross-walk of outcome tools over time. Further study is needed to identify ideal global and joint-specific tools, while balancing issues like ease of use and utility in specific populations such as the young and highly active.