BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis is a highly prevalent condition and the leading reason for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). No consensus exists about the optimal content of preoperative patient information and, to the best of our knowledge, no validated information document is available. Our objective here was to obtain validation by healthcare professionals and patients of an educational booklet for patients awaiting TKA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The booklet was developed and validated in six phases: systematic literature review, drafting of the first version, critical revision by a panel of experts, modification of the booklet, validation by a multidisciplinary panel of experts, and validation by two groups of patients, one composed of patients awaiting TKA and the other of patients in the immediate post-TKA period. We assessed the impact of the booklet based on knowledge and belief scores before and 2 days after receiving the booklet. RESULTS: Critical revision of the first draft led to changes to meet the concerns voiced by the experts. Knowledge improved only in the patient group given the booklet preoperatively (from 6/10 to 9/10, P=0.005). The booklet did not modify beliefs in either patient group. DISCUSSION: We used a rigorous methodology to develop and validate the contents of an educational booklet. Receiving this document before TKA resulted in improved patient knowledge but had no impact on beliefs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
BACKGROUND:Knee osteoarthritis is a highly prevalent condition and the leading reason for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). No consensus exists about the optimal content of preoperative patient information and, to the best of our knowledge, no validated information document is available. Our objective here was to obtain validation by healthcare professionals and patients of an educational booklet for patients awaiting TKA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The booklet was developed and validated in six phases: systematic literature review, drafting of the first version, critical revision by a panel of experts, modification of the booklet, validation by a multidisciplinary panel of experts, and validation by two groups of patients, one composed of patients awaiting TKA and the other of patients in the immediate post-TKA period. We assessed the impact of the booklet based on knowledge and belief scores before and 2 days after receiving the booklet. RESULTS: Critical revision of the first draft led to changes to meet the concerns voiced by the experts. Knowledge improved only in the patient group given the booklet preoperatively (from 6/10 to 9/10, P=0.005). The booklet did not modify beliefs in either patient group. DISCUSSION: We used a rigorous methodology to develop and validate the contents of an educational booklet. Receiving this document before TKA resulted in improved patient knowledge but had no impact on beliefs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
Authors: Anna M Anderson; Benjamin T Drew; Deborah Antcliff; Anthony C Redmond; Christine Comer; Toby O Smith; Gretl A McHugh Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2022-09-02