Ernest R Vina1, Di Ran2, Erin L Ashbeck3, Said A Ibrahim4, Michael J Hannon5, Jin J Zhou6, C Kent Kwoh3. 1. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Arizona Arthritis Center, University of Arizona, 1501 N Campbell Ave., PO Box 245093, Tucson, AZ 85724-5093. Electronic address: evina@email.arizona.edu. 2. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Arizona Arthritis Center, University of Arizona, 1501 N Campbell Ave., PO Box 245093, Tucson, AZ 85724-5093; Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 3. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of Arizona Arthritis Center, University of Arizona, 1501 N Campbell Ave., PO Box 245093, Tucson, AZ 85724-5093. 4. Department of Medicine, Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia VA Medical Center, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 5. Division of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, PA. 6. Epidemiology and Biostatistics Department, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the relationship between patient preferences for total knee replacement (TKR) with receipt of TKR, and assess participant characteristics that may influence change in willingness to undergo TKR. METHODS: Structured interviews of knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients were conducted. Logistic regression models were conducted to assess the association between baseline willingness and eventual receipt of TKR, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables. Mixed models for repeated measures were used to estimate the effects of sex, race, social support, Δ WOMAC, and orthopedic consult on change in willingness. RESULTS: A total of 589 participants were willing, and 215 participants were unwilling to undergo TKR. Willing participants, compared to others, were more often White (69.4% vs. 48.4%), with more than a high school education (60.8% vs. 47.0%) and employed (39.1% vs. 26.5%). At follow-up, the odds of having TKR were twice as high among those who were willing to have the procedure at baseline, but this was no longer significant when adjusted for demographic variables (adjusted OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 0.89-3.69). Willingness to undergo TKR declined over 2 years. Among those who were willing to undergo TKR at baseline but did not obtain one, only 66.5% were still willing at the 2-year follow-up. This decline was less among those who had a greater increase (>median) in WOMAC disability (adjusted Δ = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.47 to -0.20) than those who had minimal change in their WOMAC disability (p = 0.08). The decline in willingness was also less among those who had seen an orthopedic surgeon (adjusted Δ = -0.32, 95% CI: -0.46 to -0.17) than those who did not (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Preference for TKR was consistent with TKR surgery utilization, but not after controlling for patient demographic characteristics. Willingness to undergo TKR declined over time, but this decrease was mitigated by worsening OA-related disability and by consultation with an orthopedic surgeon.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the relationship between patient preferences for total knee replacement (TKR) with receipt of TKR, and assess participant characteristics that may influence change in willingness to undergo TKR. METHODS: Structured interviews of knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients were conducted. Logistic regression models were conducted to assess the association between baseline willingness and eventual receipt of TKR, adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables. Mixed models for repeated measures were used to estimate the effects of sex, race, social support, Δ WOMAC, and orthopedic consult on change in willingness. RESULTS: A total of 589 participants were willing, and 215 participants were unwilling to undergo TKR. Willing participants, compared to others, were more often White (69.4% vs. 48.4%), with more than a high school education (60.8% vs. 47.0%) and employed (39.1% vs. 26.5%). At follow-up, the odds of having TKR were twice as high among those who were willing to have the procedure at baseline, but this was no longer significant when adjusted for demographic variables (adjusted OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 0.89-3.69). Willingness to undergo TKR declined over 2 years. Among those who were willing to undergo TKR at baseline but did not obtain one, only 66.5% were still willing at the 2-year follow-up. This decline was less among those who had a greater increase (>median) in WOMAC disability (adjusted Δ = -0.34, 95% CI: -0.47 to -0.20) than those who had minimal change in their WOMAC disability (p = 0.08). The decline in willingness was also less among those who had seen an orthopedic surgeon (adjusted Δ = -0.32, 95% CI: -0.46 to -0.17) than those who did not (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Preference for TKR was consistent with TKR surgery utilization, but not after controlling for patient demographic characteristics. Willingness to undergo TKR declined over time, but this decrease was mitigated by worsening OA-related disability and by consultation with an orthopedic surgeon.
Authors: E L Hannan; M van Ryn; J Burke; D Stone; D Kumar; D Arani; W Pierce; S Rafii; T A Sanborn; S Sharma; J Slater; B A DeBuono Journal: Med Care Date: 1999-01 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Claude T Moorman; Tom Kirwan; Jennifer Share; Christopher Vannabouathong Journal: Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2017-09-20