Literature DB >> 22183807

Outcomes after total hip replacement based on patients' baseline status: what results can be expected?

Jose M Quintana1, Urko Aguirre, Irantzu Barrio, Miren Orive, Susana Garcia, Antonio Escobar.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated patient satisfaction with total hip replacement (THR) to establish cut points of sufficient improvement based on the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and compared them with measures derived from the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), taking into account patients' baseline status.
METHODS: Two cohorts of prospectively recruited patients on waiting lists for THR were studied. Sociodemographic data and comorbidities were recorded. Patients completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and other patient-reported outcomes questionnaires before THR and 6 months afterward. Cut points of sufficient improvement were established by the PASS, ROC, and MCID and were compared.
RESULTS: Patients satisfied with THR had, by preintervention WOMAC tertiles, gains of 19.4, 34.1, and 49.3 in the WOMAC pain domain and 17.8, 30.8, and 41.4 in the WOMAC functional limitation domain. The PASS cut points determined were 20, 25, and 25 for postintervention WOMAC pain and 28, 35, and 42 for functional limitation. ROC cut points were 19, 25, and 25 for postintervention pain and 26.4, 39, and 40 for functional limitation. Agreement among cut points classifying patients as responders to THR was 1.0 for pain with both PASS and ROC, and 0.85 for functional limitation; 0.6 for pain between MCID and PASS or ROC, and 0.58 and 0.60 for functional limitation.
CONCLUSION: Cut points of expected gain after THR can help clinicians, researchers, and managers to identify suitable candidates for THR, although such measures must be used with caution.
Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22183807     DOI: 10.1002/acr.21570

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)        ISSN: 2151-464X            Impact factor:   4.794


  12 in total

1.  Validity of the French version of the Core Outcome Measures Index for low back pain patients: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Stéphane Genevay; Marc Marty; Delphine S Courvoisier; Violaine Foltz; Geneviève Mahieu; Christophe Demoulin; Agnieszka Gierasimowicz Fontana; Michael Norberg; Pierre de Goumoëns; Christine Cedraschi; Sylvie Rozenberg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-15       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Clinical improvement and satisfaction after total joint replacement: a prospective 12-month evaluation on the patients' perspective.

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Franco M Impellizzeri; Ulrich Lenze; Vanessa Wellauer; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe; Michael Leunig
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-06-12       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Comparing the validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L to the Oxford hip and knee scores and SF-12 in osteoarthritis patients 1 year following total joint replacement.

Authors:  Barbara L Conner-Spady; Deborah A Marshall; Eric Bohm; Michael J Dunbar; Tom W Noseworthy
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-02-08       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Do Surgeon Expectations Predict Clinically Important Improvements in WOMAC Scores After THA and TKA?

Authors:  Hassan M K Ghomrawi; Carol A Mancuso; Allison Dunning; Alejandro Gonzalez Della Valle; Michael Alexiades; Charles Cornell; Thomas Sculco; Matthias Bostrom; David Mayman; Robert G Marx; Geoffrey Westrich; Michael O'Dell; Alvin I Mushlin
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Determining the clinical importance of treatment benefits for interventions for painful orthopedic conditions.

Authors:  Nathaniel P Katz; Florence C Paillard; Evan Ekman
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 2.359

6.  The design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of the posterolateral versus the direct anterior approach for THA (POLADA - trial).

Authors:  K Rykov; I H F Reininga; B A S Knobben; M S Sietsma; B L E F Ten Have
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  The Influence of Arthritis in Other Major Joints and the Spine on the One-Year Outcome of Total Hip Replacement: A Prospective, Multicenter Cohort Study (EUROHIP) Measuring the Influence of Musculoskeletal Morbidity.

Authors:  Joerg Huber; Paul Dieppe; Karsten Dreinhoefer; Klaus-Peter Günther; Andrew Judge
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2017-09-06       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Arthroplasty studies with greater than 1000 participants: analysis of follow-up methods.

Authors:  Muhammad B Tariq; José F Vega; Robert Westermann; Morgan Jones; Kurt P Spindler
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2019-05-07

9.  Availability of specific tools to assess patient reported outcomes in hip arthroplasty in Spain. Identifying the best candidates to incorporate in an arthroplasty register. A systematic review and standardized assessment.

Authors:  Jorge Arias-de la Torre; Elisa Puigdomenech; Jose M Valderas; Jonathan P Evans; Vicente Martín; Antonio J Molina; Nuria Rodríguez; Mireia Espallargues
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients 1 year postoperatively.

Authors:  Aksel Paulsen; Ewa M Roos; Alma B Pedersen; Søren Overgaard
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.