Is Information About Musculoskeletal Malignancies From Large Language Models or Web Resources at a Suitable Reading Level for Patients?

BACKGROUND: Patients and caregivers may experience immense distress when receiving the diagnosis of a primary musculoskeletal malignancy and subsequently turn to internet resources for more information. It is not clear whether these resources, including Google and ChatGPT, offer patients information that is readable, a measure of how easy text is to understand. Since many patients turn to Google and artificial intelligence resources for healthcare information, we thought it was important to ascertain whether the information they find is readable and easy to understand. The objective of this study was to compare readability of Google search results and ChatGPT answers to frequently asked questions and assess whether these sources meet NIH recommendations for readability. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the readability of ChatGPT-3.5 as a source of patient information for the three most common primary bone malignancies compared with top online resources from Google search? (2) Do ChatGPT-3.5 responses and online resources meet NIH readability guidelines for patient education materials? METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis of the 12 most common online questions about osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, and Ewing sarcoma. To be consistent with other studies of similar design that utilized national society frequently asked questions lists, questions were selected from the American Cancer Society and categorized based on content, including diagnosis, treatment, and recovery and prognosis. Google was queried using all 36 questions, and top responses were recorded. Author types, such as hospital systems, national health organizations, or independent researchers, were recorded. ChatGPT-3.5 was provided each question in independent queries without further prompting. Responses were assessed with validated reading indices to determine readability by grade level. An independent t-test was performed with significance set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Google (n = 36) and ChatGPT-3.5 (n = 36) answers were recorded, 12 for each of the three cancer types. Reading grade levels based on mean readability scores were 11.0 ± 2.9 and 16.1 ± 3.6, respectively. This corresponds to the eleventh grade reading level for Google and a fourth-year undergraduate student level for ChatGPT-3.5. Google answers were more readable across all individual indices, without differences in word count. No difference in readability was present across author type, question category, or cancer type. Of 72 total responses across both search modalities, none met NIH readability criteria at the sixth-grade level. CONCLUSION: Google material was presented at a high school reading level, whereas ChatGPT-3.5 was at an undergraduate reading level. The readability of both resources was inadequate based on NIH recommendations. Improving readability is crucial for better patient understanding during cancer treatment. Physicians should assess patients' needs, offer them tailored materials, and guide them to reliable resources to prevent reliance on online information that is hard to understand. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, prognostic study.

Which Combination is the Best? A Comparison of the Predictive Potential of Serum Biomarker Combinations to Diagnose Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

BACKGROUND: Without a gold-standard test, recent periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) literature has explored the utility of combining serological results, with promising findings. However, previous studies evaluated fewer than 200 patients and often studied only 1 to 2 test combinations. The purpose of this study was to accumulate a large single-institution cohort of revision total joint arthroplasty (rTJA) patients to determine the diagnostic utility of combination serum biomarkers to identify PJI. METHODS: A single institution longitudinal database was assessed to identify all patients who underwent rTJA from 2017 to 2020. There were 1,363 rTJA patients (715 rTKA patients and 648 rTHA patients) including 273 PJI cases (20%) analyzed. The PJI was diagnosed post-rTJA utilizing 2011 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), D-dimer, and interleukin 6 (IL-6) were systematically collected for all patients. RESULTS: The rTKA combination markers of CRP + ESR (sensitivity: 78.3%, specificity: 88.8%, positive predictive value (PPV): 70.0%, negative predictive value (NPV): 92.5%), CRP + D-dimer (sensitivity: 60.5%, specificity: 92.6%, PPV: 63.4%, NPV: 91.7%), and CRP + IL-6 (sensitivity: 38.5%, specificity: 100.0%, PPV: 100.0%, NPV: 92.9%) all yielded higher specificity than CRP alone (sensitivity: 94.4%, specificity: 75.0%, PPV: 55.5%, NPV: 97.6%). Similarly, the rTHA combination markers of CRP + ESR (sensitivity: 70.1%, specificity: 88.8%, PPV: 58.1%, NPV: 93.1%), CRP + D-dimer (sensitivity: 57.1%, specificity: 90.1%, PPV: 43.2%, NPV: 94.1%), and CRP + IL-6 (sensitivity: 21.4%, specificity: 98.4%, PPV: 60.0%, NPV: 91.7%) all yielded higher specificity than CRP alone (sensitivity: 84.7%, specificity: 77.5%, PPV: 45.4%, NPV: 95.8%). CONCLUSION: Overall, in diagnosing PJI for both rTKA and rTHA, 2-marker combinations yielded higher specificity, while 3-marker combinations yielded higher sensitivity compared to CRP alone. However, compared to all 2-marker and 3-marker combinations, CRP demonstrated superior overall diagnostic utility. These findings suggest that routine combination testing of markers for PJI diagnosis may be excessive and an unnecessary use of resources, especially in resource-limited situations.

Heterotopic Ossification Negatively Influences Range of Motion After Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of heterotopic ossification (HO) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) varies and is of unclear clinical significance. This study aimed to identify the incidence of HO in patients undergoing revision TKA for either stiffness or aseptic loosening/instability and determine if the presence of HO is associated with inferior absolute range of motion (ROM) and ROM gains. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients were prospectively enrolled and separated into 2 cohorts to evaluate ROM after revision TKA (2017-2019). Group 1 (N = 40) patients were revised for stiffness, while group 2 (N = 47) patients were revised for either aseptic loosening or instability. Goniometer-measured ROM values were obtained preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Statistical analysis included a Fisher's exact test to assess for an association between preoperative HO and final ROM at 1 year after revision TKA. RESULTS: HO was identified on preoperative radiographs in 17 patients (20%). There was a significantly higher rate of preoperative HO in patients revised for stiffness compared to patients revised for instability or loosening (30% vs 11%; P = .03). Five cases of HO qualitatively identified as most clinically severe were associated with lower ROM at each time point compared to the remainder of HO cases in this study cohort (P < .02). CONCLUSION: The presence of HO is greater in patients undergoing revision TKA for stiffness. Additionally, HO severity appears to have a major effect on preoperative and postoperative ROM trajectory. This information should help guide patient expectations and highlight the need for a comprehensive, standardized classification system for HO.