ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To determine the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and patient-reported outcome measures in a Dutch cohort who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: A retrospective national registry study of all patients who underwent primary THA or TKA between 2014 and 2020 in the Netherlands was performed. Linear mixed effects regression models were used to assess the association between SES and patient-reported outcome measures for THA and TKA patients separately. The following measures were collected: numeric rating scale for pain, Oxford Hip/Knee Score, Hip/Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and the EuroQol 5-Dimensions questionnaire. Sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, Charnley classification, and smoking status were considered as covariates in the models. RESULTS: THA patients (n = 97,443) were on average 70 years old with a body mass index of 27.4 kg/m2, and TKA patients (n = 78,811) were on average 69 years old with a body mass index of 29.7 kg/m2. Preoperatively, patients with a lower SES undergoing THA or TKA reported more severe symptoms and lower health-related quality of life. At 1-year follow-up, they also reported lower scores and less improvement over time compared to patients with a higher SES. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with lower SES report worse symptoms when admitted for surgery and less improvement after surgery. Future research must address potentially mediating factors of the association between SES and symptom reporting such as access to surgery and rehabilitation, subjectivity in reporting, and patient expectation for THA and TKA outcomes.
ABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: Examine the clinical evidence for the use of osteobiologics in hybrid surgery (combined anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and total disc replacement (TDR)) in patients with multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD). METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched between January 2000 and August 2020. Clinical studies investigating 18-80 year old patients with multilevel cervical DDD who underwent hybrid surgery with or without the use of osteobiologics were considered eligible. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed the identified articles. The methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) tool and the risk of bias (RoB 2.0) assessment tool were used to assess risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to evaluate quality of evidence across studies per outcome. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included. A decrease in cervical range of motion was observed in most studies for both the hybrid surgery and the control groups consisting of stand-alone ACDF or TDR. Fusion rates of 70-100% were reported in both the hybrid surgery and control groups consisting of stand-alone ACDF. The hybrid surgery group performed better or comparable to the control group in terms of adjacent segment degeneration. Studies reported an improvement in visual analogue scale for pain and neck disability index values after surgery compared to preoperative scores for both treatment groups. The included studies had moderate methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence for assessing the use of osteobiologics in multilevel hybrid surgery and additional high quality and controlled research is deemed essential.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: For primary knee arthroplasties, clinically meaningful thresholds of patient-reported outcomes that associate with patient satisfaction have not been defined appropriately. METHODS: In this retrospective study of 26,720 primary total knee replacements registered in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (2016-2018), receiver operating curve analysis was used to define minimal clinically important changes (MCICs) and patient acceptable symptom states (PASSs) with the anchor satisfaction. Patient-reported outcome measures were pain, European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions, Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Independent analyses were performed for groups, which showed statistically significant interactions with the (change in) score to achieve satisfaction in logistic regression. RESULTS: In this cohort, 84.9% completed the anchor questions, of whom 71.3% with a satisfaction score ≥8. Good discriminative abilities (area under the receiving operator curve >0.8) for PASS were achieved by OKS ≥38.5, pain in activity ≤2.5, Knee disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score ≤33, and Quality of Life-Index ≥0.813. Discriminative abilities for MCIC were not good. If assessed per baseline tercile, discrimination improved (area under the receiving operator curve >0.8) and yielded different MCICs per preoperative tercile (preoperative OKS ≤19: MCIC ≥19.5; pre-OKS 20-27: MCIC ≥14.5; pre-OKS ≥28: MCIC ≥8.5). For MCIC, the tercile method produced an 11% improved accuracy compared to one threshold for every patient. For the PASS scores, tercile-specific did not improve the accuracy of predicting satisfaction. Demographics were not clinically relevant in determining thresholds. CONCLUSION: Estimating the likelihood of satisfaction with surgery is critical in shared decision-making. Patients with more preoperative symptom severity require larger changes to report satisfaction. Both in the clinic and in science, such differences must be considered when predictions of satisfaction are attempted.
