Literature DB >> 8666600

Differences between patients' and physicians' evaluations of outcome after total hip arthroplasty.

J R Lieberman1, F Dorey, P Shekelle, L Schumacher, B J Thomas, D J Kilgus, G A Finerman.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare patients' and physicians' evaluations of the results of 147 total hip arthroplasties. The patients and physicians independently evaluated pain and over-all satisfaction with the outcome of the procedure using a 10.0-centimeter visual-analog scale. They also answered a questionnaire with which they assessed general health, functional ability, and pain. The mean (and standard deviation) analog rating for pain (with 0.0 centimeters indicating no pain and 10.0 centimeters, severe pain) was 1.7 +/- 2.6 centimeters as assessed by the patients and 1.1 +/- 1.8 centimeters as assessed by the physicians (p < 0.001, paired t test). The mean analog rating for over-all satisfaction (with 0.0 centimeters indicating poor and 10.0 centimeters, excellent) was 8.6 +/- 2.1 centimeters as assessed by the patients and 8.8 +/- 1.7 centimeters as assessed by the physicians (p = 0.07, paired t test). There was a marked disparity between the patients' and the physicians' scores when the patients assigned a low score to a particular area. For the thirty patients who rated the pain as more than 4.0 centimeters, the mean analog rating was 6.8 +/- 2.1 centimeters according to the patients, while it was 3.6 +/- 2.7 centimeters according to the physicians (p < 0.001, linear regression). The mean analog rating for over-all satisfaction according to the nineteen patients who rated this parameter as less than 7.0 centimeters was 3.8 +/- 2.0 centimeters, while the mean rating according to the physicians 6.5 +/- 2.8 centimeters (p < 0.001, linear regression). The patients' and physicians' evaluations were similar regarding the results of the total hip arthroplasty when the patients had little or no pain and were satisfied with the result. However, the disparity increased as the patients' ratings for pain increased and their ratings for over-all satisfaction decreased. This study highlights a discrepancy between patients' and physicians' evaluations of the results of total hip arthroplasty. This discrepancy increased when the patient was not satisfied with the outcome. The use of patients' self-administered questionnaires as well as traditional physician-generated assessments may provide a more complete evaluation of the results of total hip arthroplasty.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8666600     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199606000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  58 in total

1.  Physical activity monitoring based on accelerometry: validation and comparison with video observation.

Authors:  K Aminian; P Robert; E E Buchser; B Rutschmann; D Hayoz; M Depairon
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Temporal feature estimation during walking using miniature accelerometers: an analysis of gait improvement after hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  K Aminian; K Rezakhanlou; E De Andres; C Fritsch; P F Leyvraz; P Robert
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 2.602

3.  A new high-flexion knee scoring system to eliminate the ceiling effect.

Authors:  Sang-Eun Na; Chul-Won Ha; Choong-Hee Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Clinical assessment after total hip arthroplasty using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip-Disease Evaluation Questionnaire.

Authors:  Kiyokazu Fukui; Ayumi Kaneuji; Tanzo Sugimori; Toru Ichiseki; Tadami Matsumoto; Yoshimitsu Hiejima
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2015-02-21

5.  Patient-physicians' information exchange in outpatient cardiac care: time for a heart to heart?

Authors:  Urmimala Sarkar; Dean Schillinger; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; Anna Nápoles; Leah Karliner; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2010-10-28

6.  Level of patient-physician agreement in assessment of change following conservative rehabilitation for shoulder pain.

Authors:  Stephanie D Moore-Reed; W Ben Kibler; Heather Bush; Tim L Uhl
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2016-07-15

7.  Indications for total hip replacement: comparison of assessments of orthopaedic surgeons and referring physicians.

Authors:  K E Dreinhöfer; P Dieppe; T Stürmer; D Gröber-Grätz; M Flören; K-P Günther; W Puhl; H Brenner
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2006-01-26       Impact factor: 19.103

8.  Oxford hip scores at 6 months and 5 years are associated with total hip revision within the subsequent 2 years.

Authors:  Peter Devane; Geoffrey Horne; Daniel J Gehling
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Measuring differences between patients' and physicians' health perceptions: the patient-physician discordance scale.

Authors:  Maida J Sewitch; Michal Abrahamowicz; Patricia L Dobkin; Robyn Tamblyn
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2003-06

10.  A combined sEMG and accelerometer system for monitoring functional activity in stroke.

Authors:  Serge H Roy; M Samuel Cheng; Shey-Sheen Chang; John Moore; Gianluca De Luca; S Hamid Nawab; Carlo J De Luca
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.802

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.