Consensus for a primary care clinical decision-making tool for assessing, diagnosing, and managing shoulder pain in Alberta, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder pain is a highly prevalent condition and a significant cause of morbidity and functional disability. Current data suggests that many patients presenting with shoulder pain at the primary care level are not receiving high quality care. Primary care decision-making is complex and has the potential to influence the quality of care provided and patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop a clinical decision-making tool that standardizes care and minimizes uncertainty in assessment, diagnosis, and management. METHODS: First a rapid review was conducted to identify existing tools and evidence that could support a comprehensive clinical decision-making tool for shoulder pain. Secondly, provincial consensus was established for the assessment, diagnosis, and management of patients presenting to primary care with shoulder pain in Alberta, Canada using a three-step modified Delphi approach. This project was a highly collaborative effort between Alberta Health Services' Bone and Joint Health Strategic Clinical Network (BJH SCN) and the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI). RESULTS: A clinical decision-making tool for shoulder pain was developed and reached consensus by a province-wide expert panel representing various health disciplines and geographical regions. This tool consists of a clinical examination algorithm for assessing, diagnosis, and managing shoulder pain; recommendations for history-taking and identification of red flags or additional concerns; recommendations for physical examination and neurological screening; recommendations for the differential diagnosis; and care pathways for managing patients presenting with rotator cuff disease, biceps pathology, superior labral tear, adhesive capsulitis, osteoarthritis, and instability. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical decision-making tool will help to standardize care, provide guidance on the diagnosis and management of shoulder pain, and assist in clinical decision-making for primary care providers in both public and private sectors.

Trends in Cemented Fixation in Hemiarthroplasty for Hip Fractures in Canada.

Bacground: The use of cemented fixation is widely recommended in hip arthroplasty for hip fractures, although it is not used universally. Methods: We describe the trends in cementing prevalence in hemiarthroplasty for hip fractures in Canada for patients ≥55 years old between April 2017 and March 2022. Results: The national prevalence of cemented fixation increased from 43% in 2017/18 to 58% in 2021/22, but there was a large variety of both the baseline prevalence and the trends across the country and between individual hospitals. The proportion of surgeons only performing cementless fixation fell from 30% to 21% between 2018/19 and 2021/22. Conclusions: As cemented fixation is now universally recommended, more coordination is needed to track these trends and to help drive implementation of this evidence-based practice across Canada.

Consensus for a primary care clinical decision-making tool for assessing, diagnosing, and managing low back pain in Alberta, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition causing disability and high healthcare costs. Alberta faces challenges with unnecessary referrals to specialists and long wait times. A province-wide standardized clinical care pathway based on evidence-based best practices can improve efficiency, reduce wait times, and enhance patient outcomes. Implementing such pathways has shown success in other areas of healthcare in Alberta. This study developed a clinical decision-making pathway to standardize care and minimize uncertainty in assessment, diagnosis, and management. METHODS: A systematic rapid review identified existing tools and evidence that could support a comprehensive LBP clinical decision-making tool. Forty-seven healthcare professionals participated in four rounds of a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on the assessment, diagnosis, and management of patients presenting to primary care with LBP in Alberta, Canada. This project was a collaborative effort between Alberta Health Services' Bone and Joint Health Strategic Clinical Network (BJHSCN) and the Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI). RESULTS: A province-wide expert panel consisting of professionals from different health disciplines and regions collaborated to develop an LBP clinical decision-making tool. This tool presents clinical care pathways for acute, subacute, and chronic LBP. It also provides guidance for history-taking, physical examination, patient education, and management. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical decision-making tool will help to standardize care, provide guidance on the diagnosis and management of LBP, and assist in clinical decision-making for primary care providers in both public and private sectors.

The Development and validation of a self-administered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33).

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop a self-administered evaluative tool to measure health-related quality of life in young, active patients with hip disorders. METHODS: This outcome measure was developed for active patients (aged 18 to 60 years, Tegner activity level ≥ 4) presenting with a variety of symptomatic hip conditions. This multicenter study recruited patients from international hip arthroscopy and arthroplasty surgeon practices. The outcome was created using a process of item generation (51 patients), item reduction (150 patients), and pretesting (31 patients). The questionnaire was tested for test-retest reliability (123 patients); face, content, and construct validity (51 patients); and responsiveness over a 6-month period in post-arthroscopy patients (27 patients). RESULTS: Initially, 146 items were identified. This number was reduced to 60 through item reduction, and the items were categorized into 4 domains: (1) symptoms and functional limitations; (2) sports and recreational physical activities; (3) job-related concerns; and (4) social, emotional, and lifestyle concerns. The items were then formatted using a visual analog scale. Test-retest reliability showed Pearson correlations greater than 0.80 for 33 of the 60 questions. The intraclass correlation statistic was 0.78, and the Cronbach α was .99. Face validity and content validity were ensured during development, and construct validity was shown with a correlation of 0.81 to the Non-Arthritic Hip Score. Responsiveness was shown with a paired t test (P ≤ .01), effect size of 2.0, standardized response mean of 1.7, responsiveness ratio of 6.7, and minimal clinically important difference of 6 points. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a new quality-of-life patient-reported outcome measure, the 33-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). This questionnaire uses a visual analog scale response format designed for computer self-administration by young, active patients with hip pathology. Its development has followed the most rigorous methodology involving a very large number of patients. The iHOT-33 has been shown to be reliable; shows face, content, and construct validity; and is highly responsive to clinical change. In our opinion the iHOT-33 can be used as a primary outcome measure for prospective patient evaluation and randomized clinical trials.

Functional outcomes for 2 years comparing hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty.

This prospective observational study of 499 patients with hip resurfacing and 255 patients with total hip arthroplasty compared outcomes for 2 years. We used propensity scores to identify matched cohorts of 118 patients with hip resurfacing and 118 patients with total hip arthroplasty. We used these cohorts to compare improvements in the Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index and Medical Outcomes Short-Form 36 physical function component (SF-36 PF) scores at 3 months and at 1 and 2 years postsurgery. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements from baseline in WOMAC and SF-36 PF. Improvements in SF-36 PF were greater for patients with hip resurfacing than for patients with total hip arthroplasty 1 and 2 years postsurgery; improvements in WOMAC were similar for both groups. The clinical significance of this observation needs further investigation.

A critical review of weight loss recommendations before total knee arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE: Increased infection risk after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with a higher body mass index (BMI), particularly a BMI ≥40kg/m2, suggests that BMI reduction (through weight loss) prior to TKA may be important. However, the impact of weight loss on TKA risk reduction is unclear. Furthermore, weight loss could have detrimental consequences with respect to muscle loss and development of sarcopenic obesity, whereby a potential weight loss paradox in adults with advanced knee OA and obesity may be present. Using a critical review approach, we examined the current evidence supporting weight loss in adults with obesity and advanced knee osteoarthritis (OA). We focused on three key areas: (1) TKA complication risk with severe obesity compared to obesity (BMI ≥40kg/m2 versus 30.0-39.9kg/m2); (2) weight loss recommendations for individuals with advanced knee OA; and (3) TKA outcomes after pre-surgical weight loss. METHODS: Medline and CINAHL databases were examined from Jan 2010 to May 2020 to identify high-level and/or clinically-influential evidence (systematic reviews, meta-analyses and clinical practice guidelines). RESULTS: The literature does not show a clear relationship between weight loss and reduction in TKA complications, and no indication that a patients' individual risk is lowered by reducing their BMI from a threshold of ≥40kg/m2 to ≤39.9kg/m2. Studies that have found a benefit of weight loss for knee OA have not included patients with higher BMIs (≥40kg/m2) or more advanced knee OA. Furthermore, there is unclear evidence of a benefit of pre-surgical weight loss on TKA outcomes. These are important evidence gaps, suggesting that recommendations for BMI reduction prior to TKA should be tempered by the current uncertainty in the literature. CONCLUSION: Evidence to support a benefit of weight loss prior to TKA is lacking. Until knowledge gaps are clarified, it is recommended that practitioners consider individual patient needs and risk before recommending weight loss (and therefore BMI reduction).

Revision total knee arthroplasty using large distal femoral augments for severe metaphyseal bone deficiency: a preliminary study.

Managing severe structural femoral metaphyseal bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty is a challenging problem facing the revision knee surgeon. This study assesses the use of large (30 mm) metal distal femoral augments to compensate for severe bone deficiencies. Hospital for Special Surgery scores, Knee Society scores, and range of motion improved after implantation of femoral components with 30-mm distal femoral augments. There was no radiographic evidence of loosening, and no implants had been revised at mean 37-month follow-up. This appears to be an acceptable technique based on the intermediate-term results.