Literature DB >> 23955192

Challenges in outcome measurement: discrepancies between patient and provider definitions of success.

Philip C Noble1, Sophie Fuller-Lafreniere, Morteza Meftah, Maureen K Dwyer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Some orthopaedic procedures, including TKA, enjoy high survivorship but leave many patients dissatisfied because of residual pain and functional limitations. An important cause of patient dissatisfaction is unfulfilled preoperative expectations. This arises, in part, from differences between provider and patient in their definition of a successful outcome. WHERE ARE WE NOW?: Patients generally are less satisfied with their outcomes than surgeons. While patients are initially concerned with symptom relief, their long-term expectations include return of symptom-free function, especially in terms of activities that are personally important. While surgeons share their patients' desire to achieve their goals, they are aware this will not always occur. Conversely, patients do not always realize some of their expectations cannot be met by current orthopaedic procedures, and this gap in understanding is an important source of discrepancies in expectations and patient dissatisfaction. WHERE DO WE NEED TO GO?: An essential prerequisite for mutual understanding is information that is accurate, objective, and relevant to the patient's condition and lifestyle. This critical information must also be understandable within the educational and cultural background of each patient to enable informed participation in a shared decision making process. Once this is achieved, it will become easier to formulate similar expectations regarding the likely level of function and symptom relief and the risk of adverse events, including persistent pain, complications, and revision surgery. HOW DO WE GET THERE?: Predictive models of patient outcomes, based on objective data, are needed to inform decision making on the individual level. This can be achieved once comprehensive data become available capturing the lifestyles of patients of diverse ages and backgrounds, including data documenting the frequency and intensity of participation in sporting and recreational activities. There is also a need for greater attention to the process of informing patients of the outcome of orthopaedic procedures, not simply for gaining more meaningful consent, but so that patients and providers may achieve greater alignment of expectations and increased acceptance of both the benefits and limitations of alternative treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23955192      PMCID: PMC3792266          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3198-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  71 in total

1.  Shared decision-making and the orthopaedic workforce.

Authors:  J D Lurie; J N Weinstein
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Does impact sport activity influence total hip arthroplasty durability?

Authors:  Matthieu Ollivier; Solenne Frey; Sebastien Parratte; Xavier Flecher; Jean-Noël Argenson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  What functional activities are important to patients with knee replacements?

Authors:  Jennifer M Weiss; Philip C Noble; Michael A Conditt; Harold W Kohl; Seth Roberts; Karon F Cook; Michael J Gordon; Kenneth B Mathis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Patient satisfaction, function and return to work after knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  L P Jorn; R Johnsson; S Toksvig-Larsen
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1999-08

Review 5.  Knee joint forces: prediction, measurement, and significance.

Authors:  Darryl D D'Lima; Benjamin J Fregly; Shantanu Patil; Nikolai Steklov; Clifford W Colwell
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.617

6.  Health related quality of life outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasties in a community based population.

Authors:  C A Jones; D C Voaklander; D W Johnston; M E Suarez-Almazor
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.666

7.  The John Charnley Award. Wear is a function of use, not time.

Authors:  T P Schmalzried; E F Shepherd; F J Dorey; W O Jackson; M dela Rosa; F Fa'vae; H A McKellop; C D McClung; J Martell; J R Moreland; H C Amstutz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: a prospective study of 1217 patients.

Authors:  C E H Scott; C R Howie; D MacDonald; L C Biant
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-09

9.  Measuring the success of treatment in patient terms.

Authors:  K B Bayley; M R London; G L Grunkemeier; D J Lansky
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Randomized trials to modify patients' preoperative expectations of hip and knee arthroplasties.

Authors:  Carol A Mancuso; Suzanne Graziano; Lisa M Briskie; Margaret G E Peterson; Paul M Pellicci; Eduardo A Salvati; Thomas P Sculco
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  18 in total

1.  Patient reported outcome measures of bilateral reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared to bilateral anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Benjamin Thomas Welborn; R Bryan Butler; Bonnie P Dumas; Lisa Mock; Cory A Messerschmidt; Richard J Friedman
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-08-07

Review 2.  Functional outcomes assessment in shoulder surgery.

Authors:  James D Wylie; James T Beckmann; Erin Granger; Robert Z Tashjian
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-11-18

3.  Patients' expectations of shoulder instability repair.

Authors:  Johannes E Plath; Tim Saier; Matthias J Feucht; Philipp Minzlaff; Gernot Seppel; Sepp Braun; Daniel Hatch; Andreas B Imhoff
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Influence of tibial rotation in total knee arthroplasty on knee kinematics and retropatellar pressure: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Arnd Steinbrück; Christian Schröder; Matthias Woiczinski; Tatjana Müller; Peter E Müller; Volkmar Jansson; Andreas Fottner
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-01-11       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Motivating patient adherence to allergic rhinitis treatments.

Authors:  Bruce G Bender
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.806

6.  Physician-Patient Communication in the Orthopedic Clinic: Surgeon-Identified Challenges.

Authors:  Olivia C O'Reilly; Alan G Shamrock; Marcy Rosenbaum; Charles R Clark; Brendan M Patterson
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2022-06

7.  Measuring outcomes in rotator cuff disorders.

Authors:  Aditya Prinja; Sanjeeve Sabharwal; Sebastian Moshtael; Paola Dey; Puneet Monga
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2021-05-21

Review 8.  Patient-reported outcome measures after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  P N Ramkumar; J D Harris; P C Noble
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 5.853

9.  Return-to-Work Following Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Proximal Humerus Fractures.

Authors:  Michael Dietrich; Mathias Wasmer; Andreas Platz; Christian Spross
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2014-09-15

10.  Perceived quality of physiotherapist-led orthopaedic triage compared with standard practice in primary care: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Karin S Samsson; Susanne Bernhardsson; Maria E H Larsson
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.