ABSTRACT
Background: The Quality of Patient-Surgeon Relationship (QPASREL) is an 11-item questionnaire developed and validated to assess the relationship between practitioners and patients on recovery and return to work after surgery. Purpose: To evaluate the association of patient-surgeon relationship (PSR) and patient-physical therapist relationship (PPR), as measured by QPASREL, with a patient's return to sports (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This study targeted patients who underwent primary ACLR at a specialized sports surgery referral center between January and May 2021. Patients who had revision surgery, multiligamentous knee injury, and sedentary status were excluded from the study. Patients were grouped based on ability to RTS at the preinjury level 1 year postoperatively (RTS group and no-RTS group). The primary outcome was rate of RTS at 1 year postoperatively, and the primary dependent variables were the quality of PSR and PPR as measured by QPASREL scores at 6-month intervals. Secondary outcomes were the correlation and discriminative capacity of the QPASREL compared with the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport After Injury (ACL-RSI) scores (collected at 6-month intervals). Results: The study included 243 patients. Patients in the RTS group exhibited a higher mean PPR QPASREL score (36.6 ± 5.1) compared with no-RTS patients (34.8 ± 5.2; P = .01) as well as a higher mean PSR score (35.7 ± 5.1) compared with no-RTS patients (33.8 ± 5.9; P = .01). Multivariate analysis showed that every 5-point increase in the QPASREL scores for PPR and PSR resulted in a 39% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.39; P = 0.014) and 35% (OR = 1.35, P = 0.021) increased odds of RTS, respectively. A weak yet positive correlation was found between QPASREL and ACL-RSI. The predictive capacity of the QPASREL (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.60 for PPR and 0.61 for PSR), although significant, was less powerful compared with that of the ACL-RSI (AUC = 0.73). Conclusion: The quality of the PPR and PSR, as measured by QPASREL scores, demonstrated a significant association with RTS rates at 1 year after ACLR. A weak yet positive correlation was found between QPASREL and ACL-RSI.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of a patient-specific, customized individually made (CIM) total knee replacement (TKR) using the ORIGIN® prosthesis. METHODS: This was a prospective study conducted at a University Hospital from January 15, 2019, to April 30, 2021. The study included patients planned for an ORIGIN® CIM TKR procedure. Exclusion criteria included revision surgery, severe deformity, stiffness, or laxity. Evaluations were carried out using computed tomography scans performed 8 weeks preoperatively and 6 weeks postoperatively. The primary outcome measurements were the preoperative, planned, and postoperative CT scan alignment measurements including the Hip-Knee-Ankle (HKA) angle, mechanical Medial Distal Femoral articular surface Angle (mMDFA, distal alpha angle), Posterior Distal femoral articular surface angle (PDFA, posterior alpha angle), mechanical Medial Proximal Tibial articular surface Angle (mMPTA, beta angle) and posterior proximal tibial angle (PPTA). Secondary outcomes included the accuracy of implant positioning with percentage of outliers at 2° and 3° RESULTS: The study encompassed 51 knees from 50 patients with mean age of 68.1 (SD = 8.89). The overall HKA angle deviated by -0.93° [95% CI: -1.45; -0.43], and the PDFA angle by -0.61° [95% CI: -1.07; -0.15], while the mMPTA exceeded planned values by 1.00° [95% CI: 0.57; 1.43]. The 3° outliers rate ranged from 3.9% for the mMPTA to 7.8% for the HKA alignment, with no outliers in mMDFA and PPTA. Similarly, the 2° outliers rate ranged from 15.7% for both the PDFA angle and mMPTA to 19.6% for the HKA alignment. The Bland-Altman plots further emphasized the precision of planned and post-operative angles across all measurements. CONCLUSION: The CIM TKR showed high accuracy and reproducibility, closely matching preoperative planning. The weakest accuracy at 3°-outliers is in the reproduction of the HKA alignment at 92.2% (range for all angle: 92.2-100%). Similarly, the weakest accuracy at 2°-outliers is in the reproduction of the HKA alignment at 80.4% (range for all angles: 80.4-92.2%).
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of dynamic intermittent compression cryotherapy (DICC) (CryoNov®) with an intravenous nefopam-based pain management protocol (DCIVNPP) in reducing post-operative pain following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) compared to static compression cryotherapy (SCC) (Igloo®) and oral Nefopam. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data including 676 patients who underwent primary ACLR in 2022. Patients were either in the DCIVNPP group or in the SCC (control group), and were matched for age, sex, and Lysholm and Tegner scores (338 per arm). The primary outcome was pain on the visual analogue scale (VAS), analyzed in relation to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for VAS. The secondary outcome was side effects. RESULTS: Postoperative pain in the DCIVNPP group was less severe on the VAS than in the control group (p < 0.05). The maximum difference in the VAS between groups was 0.57, which is less than the MCID threshold for VAS. The DCIVNPP group crossed the PASS threshold for VAS on Day 3, sooner than the control group. The side effect profiles were similar in both groups except for higher rates of dizziness and malaise in the DCIVNPP group, and higher rates of abdominal pain in the control group. Most of the side effects decreased over time in both groups, with no significant side effects after Day 3. CONCLUSION: DCIVNPP effectively allows for faster pain recovery than in the control group. The difference in side effects between the protocols may be due to mode of administration of nefopam. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
