Patient-reported outcome measures offer little additional value two years after arthroplasty
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Aims: The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess the outcome after total knee (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasing, with associated regulatory mandates. However, the robustness and clinical relevance of long-term data are often questionable. It is important to determine whether using long-term PROMs data justify the resources, costs, and difficulties associated with their collection. The aim of this study was to assess studies involving TKA and THA to determine which PROMs are most commonly reported, how complete PROMs data are at ≥ five years postoperatively, and the extent to which the scores change between early and long-term follow-up. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with sufficient reporting of PROMs were included. The mean difference in scores from the preoperative condition to early follow-up times (between one and two years), and from early to final follow-up, were calculated. The mean rates of change in the scores were calculated from representative studies. Meta-analyses were also performed on the most frequently reported PROMs. Results: A total of 24 studies were assessed. The most frequently reported PROMs were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) for TKA and the University of California, Los Angeles activity scale for THA. The mean rate of follow-up based on the number of patients available at final follow-up was 70.5% (39.2% to 91.0%) for knees and 82.1% (63.2% to 92.3%) for hips. The actual rates of collection of PROM scores were lower. For TKA, the mean OKS, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and transformed WOMAC changes were -16.3 (95% CI -17.5 to -15.2), 23.2 (95% CI 17.2 to 29.2), and -29.7 (95% CI -32.4 to -27.0) points for short-term follow-up. These decreased to 1.3 (95% CI -0.8 to 3.3), -3.4 (95% CI -7.0 to 0.3), and 4.7 (95% CI -1.5 to 10.9) points for the remaining follow-up. A similar meta-analysis was not possible for studies involving THA. We commonly observed that the scores plateaued after between one and two years, and that there was little or no change beyond this time. Conclusion: The long-term PROMs for TKA and THA beyond one or two years are often incomplete and lose sensitivity at this time. Given the considerable resources, costs, and challenges associated with the collection of these scores, their clinical value is questionable. Therefore, consideration should be given to abandoning the requirement for the collection of long-term PROMs in favour of more robust and reliable measures of success that offer more clinical relevance and use.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».