Literature DB >> 22844046

The effect of surgical factors on early patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) following total knee replacement.

P N Baker1, D J Deehan, D Lees, S Jameson, P J Avery, P J Gregg, M R Reed.   

Abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to assess functional outcome and patient satisfaction. They provide a framework for comparisons between surgical units, and individual surgeons for benchmarking and financial remuneration. Better performance may bring the reward of more customers as patients and commissioners seek out high performers for their elective procedures. Using National Joint Registry (NJR) data linked to PROMs we identified 22,691 primary total knee replacements (TKRs) undertaken for osteoarthritis in England and Wales between August 2008 and February 2011, and identified the surgical factors that influenced the improvements in the Oxford knee score (OKS) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) assessment using multiple regression analysis. After correction for patient factors the only surgical factors that influenced PROMs were implant brand and hospital type (both p < 0.001). However, the effects of surgical factors upon the PROMs were modest compared with patient factors. For both the OKS and the EQ-5D the most important factors influencing the improvement in PROMs were the corresponding pre-operative score and the patient's general health status. Despite having only a small effect on PROMs, this study has shown that both implant brand and hospital type do influence reported subjective functional scores following TKR. In the current climate of financial austerity, proposed performance-based remuneration and wider patient choice, it would seem unwise to ignore these effects and the influence of a range of additional patient factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22844046     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B8.28786

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  45 in total

1.  The Oxford knee score and its subscales do not exhibit a ceiling or a floor effect in knee arthroplasty patients: an analysis of the National Health Service PROMs data set.

Authors:  Kristina Harris; Christopher R Lim; Jill Dawson; Ray Fitzpatrick; David J Beard; Andrew J Price
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Do modern total knee replacements offer better value for money? A health economic analysis.

Authors:  David F Hamilton; Nicholas D Clement; Richard Burnett; James T Patton; Mathew Moran; Colin R Howie; A H R W Simpson; Paul Gaston
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-07-09       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  When to operate: online patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can help decide.

Authors:  William John Edward Reeve; Daniel H Williams
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2016-04-18

4.  Accuracy of tibial cuts with patient-specific instrumentation is not influenced by the surgeon's level of experience.

Authors:  Alexander Antoniadis; Roland S Camenzind; Michael O Schär; Dario Bergadano; Näder Helmy
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-06-05       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Does Medial Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis Influence Outcome Scores and Risk of Revision After Fixed-bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty?

Authors:  Y Berger; S Ftaita; E Thienpont
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in U.S. Total joint replacement registries: rationale, status, and plans.

Authors:  Patricia D Franklin; David Lewallen; Kevin Bozic; Brian Hallstrom; William Jiranek; David C Ayers
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Post-operative Oxford knee score can be used to indicate whether patient expectations have been achieved after primary total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  N D Clement; D MacDonald; J T Patton; R Burnett
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  The minimal clinically important difference in the Oxford knee score and Short Form 12 score after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  N D Clement; D MacDonald; A H R W Simpson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Can Machine Learning Algorithms Predict Which Patients Will Achieve Minimally Clinically Important Differences From Total Joint Arthroplasty?

Authors:  Mark Alan Fontana; Stephen Lyman; Gourab K Sarker; Douglas E Padgett; Catherine H MacLean
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Risk factors for early revision after primary total hip arthroplasty in Medicare patients.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Vanessa Chan; Steven Kurtz; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.