Does psychological distress predict risk of orthopaedic surgery and postoperative opioid prescribing in patients with hip pain? A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians and public health professionals have allocated resources to curb opioid over-prescription and address psychological needs among patients with musculoskeletal pain. However, associations between psychological distress, risk of surgery, and opioid prescribing among those with hip pathologies remain unclear. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort study design, we identified patients that were evaluated for hip pain from January 13, 2020 to October 27, 2021. Patients' surgical histories and postoperative opioid prescriptions were extracted via chart review. Risk of hip surgery within one year of evaluation was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Multivariable linear regression was employed to predict average morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day of opioid prescriptions within the first 30 days after surgery. Candidate predictors included age, gender, race, ethnicity, employment, insurance type, hip function and quality of life on the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and psychological distress phenotype using the OSPRO Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) Assessment Tool. RESULTS: Of the 672 patients, n = 350 (52.1%) underwent orthopaedic surgery for hip pain. In multivariable analysis, younger patients, those with TRICARE/other government insurance, and those with a high psychological distress phenotype had higher odds of surgery. After adding iHOT-12 scores, younger patients and lower iHOT-12 scores were associated with higher odds of surgery, while Black/African American patients had lower odds of surgery. In multivariable analysis of average MME, patients with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) received opioid prescriptions with significantly higher average MME than those with other procedures, and surgery type was the only significant predictor. Post-hoc analysis excluding PAO found higher average MME for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (compared to arthroplasty or other non-PAO procedures) and significantly lower average MME for patients with public insurance (Medicare/Medicaid) compared to those with private insurance. Among those only undergoing arthroscopy, older age and having public insurance were associated with opioid prescriptions with lower average MME. Neither iHOT-12 scores nor OSPRO-YF phenotype assignment were significant predictors of postoperative mean MME. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress characteristics are modifiable targets for rehabilitation programs, but their use as prognostic factors for risk of orthopaedic surgery and opioid prescribing in patients with hip pain appears limited when considered alongside other commonly collected clinical information such as age, insurance, type of surgery pursued, and iHOT-12 scores.

The association of pre-existing mental health conditions and patient outcomes after lower extremity orthopaedic trauma: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Existing research has established a correlation between post-traumatic mental health conditions, including anxiety and depression, and various aspects of recovery, such as pain exacerbations, reduced functional recovery, and lowered patient satisfaction. However, the influence of pre-existing mental health conditions on orthopaedic trauma outcomes has not been thoroughly investigated. The objective of this study was to systematically review literature addressing the association between pre-existing mental health conditions and patient outcomes following surgical interventions for lower extremity fractures in non-geriatric populations. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases following PRISMA-ScR guidelines to select studies that examined lower extremity orthopaedic trauma outcomes in relation to pre-existing mental health conditions. Studies that evaluated patients with surgically treated lower extremity fractures and a history of mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, or mood disorders were included. Studies with a mean patient age above 65 years of age were excluded to focus on non-geriatric injury patterns. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 12 studies investigating the relationship between surgical outcomes of orthopaedic lower extremity fractures and pre-existing mental health disorders in non-geriatric populations. Studies included patients with pelvis, femur, tibia, and ankle fractures. A majority (83%) of these studies demonstrated that patients with pre-existing mental health diagnoses had inferior functional outcomes, heightened pain levels, or an increase in postoperative complications. DISCUSSION: The presence of pre-existing mental health conditions, particularly anxiety and depression, may predispose orthopaedic trauma patients to an elevated risk of suboptimal functional outcomes, increased pain, or complications after surgical intervention for lower extremity fractures. Future research should focus on interventions that mitigate the impact of mental health conditions on orthopaedic outcomes and patient wellness in this population.

Leveraging web-based prediction calculators to set patient expectations for elective spine surgery: a qualitative study to inform implementation.

BACKGROUND: Prediction calculators can help set outcomes expectations following orthopaedic surgery, however effective implementation strategies for these tools are unknown. This study evaluated provider and patient perspectives on clinical implementation of web-based prediction calculators developed using national prospective spine surgery registry data from the Quality Outcomes Database. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews in two health systems, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) and Duke University Health System (DUHS) of orthopedic and neurosurgery health care providers (VUMC: n = 19; DUHS: n = 6), health care administrators (VUMC: n = 9; DUHS: n = 9), and patients undergoing elective spine surgery (VUMC: n = 16). Qualitative template analysis was used to analyze interview data, with a focus on end-user perspectives regarding clinical implementation of web-based prediction tools. RESULTS: Health care providers, administrators and patients overwhelmingly supported the use of the calculators to help set realistic expectations for surgical outcomes. Some clinicians had questions about the validity and applicability of the calculators in their patient population. A consensus was that the calculators needed seamless integration into clinical workflows, but there was little agreement on best methods for selecting which patients to complete the calculators, timing, and mode of completion. Many interviewees expressed concerns that calculator results could influence payers, or expose risk of liability. Few patients expressed concerns over additional survey burden if they understood that the information would directly inform their care. CONCLUSIONS: Interviewees had a largely positive opinion of the calculators, believing they could aid in discussions about expectations for pain and functional recovery after spine surgery. No single implementation strategy is likely to be successful, and strategies vary, even within the same healthcare system. Patients should be well-informed of how responses will be used to deliver better care, and concerns over how the calculators could impact payment and liability should be addressed prior to use. Future research is necessary to determine whether use of calculators improves management and outcomes for people seeking a surgical consult for spine pain.

Association Between Preoperative Multidimensional Psychological Distress and Physical Function After Surgery for Sports-Related Injury.

Background: Psychological distress after orthopaedic surgery can lead to worse outcomes, including higher levels of disability and pain and lower quality of life. The 10-item Optimal Screening for Prediction for Referral and Outcome-Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) survey screens for multiple psychological constructs relevant to recovery from orthopaedic injury and may be useful to preoperatively identify patients who may require further psychological assessment and possible intervention after surgery. Purpose/Hypothesis: To determine the association between the OSPRO-YF and physiological patient-reported outcomes (PROs). It was hypothesized that higher OSPRO-YF scores (indicating worse psychological distress) would be associated with worse PRO scores at time of return to sport. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This study evaluated 107 patients at a single, academic health center who were assessed at a sports orthopaedics clinic and ultimately treated surgically for injuries to the knee, shoulder, foot, or ankle. Preoperatively, patients completed the OSPRO-YF survey as well as the following PRO measures: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, numeric rating scale for pain; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons standardized shoulder assessment form for patients with shoulder injuries, the International Knee Documentation Committee score (for patients with knee injuries), and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM; for patients with foot or ankle injuries). At the time of anticipated full recovery and/or return to sport, patients again completed the same PRO surveys. Multivariable regression was used to evaluate the association between total OSPRO-YF score at baseline and PRO scores at the time of functional recovery. Results: The baseline OSPRO-YF score predicted postoperative PROMIS Physical Function and FAAM Sports scores only. A 1-unit increase in the OSPRO-YF was associated with a 0.55-point reduction in PROMIS Physical Function (95% CI, -1.05 to -0.04; P = .033) indicating worse outcomes. Among patients who underwent ankle surgery, a 1-unit increase in OSPRO-YF was associated with a 6.45-point reduction in FAAM Sports (95% CI, -12.0 to -0.87; P = .023). Conclusion: The study findings demonstrated that the OSPRO-YF survey predicts certain long-term PRO scores at the time of expected return to sport, independent of baseline scores.

Development of Reliable and Valid Negative Mood Screening Tools for Orthopaedic Patients with Musculoskeletal Pain.

BACKGROUND: Negative mood is an important risk factor for poor clinical outcomes among individuals with musculoskeletal pain. Screening for negative mood can aid in identifying those who may need additional psychological interventions. Limitations of current negative mood screening tools include (1) high response burden, (2) a focus on single dimensions of negative mood, (3) poor precision for identifying individuals with low or high negative mood levels, and/or (4) design not specific for use in populations with orthopaedic conditions and musculoskeletal pain. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can item response theory methods be used to construct screening tools for negative mood (such as depression, anxiety, and anger) in patients undergoing physical therapy for orthopaedic conditions? (2) Do these tools demonstrate reliability and construct validity when used in a clinical setting? METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study involving outpatients having physical therapy in tertiary-care settings. A total of 431 outpatients with neck (n = 93), shoulder (n = 108), low back (n = 119), or knee (n = 111) conditions were enrolled between December 2014 and December 2015, with 24% (103 of 431) seeking care after orthopaedic surgery. Participants completed three validated psychological questionnaires measuring negative mood, resulting in 39 candidate items for item response theory analysis. Factor analysis was used to identify the dimensions (factors) assessed by the candidate items and select items that loaded on the main factor of interest (negative mood), establishing a unidimensional item set. Unidimensionality of an item set suggests they are assessing one main factor or trait, allowing unbiased score estimates. The identified items were assessed for their fit to the graded item response theory model. This model allows for items to vary by the level of difficulty they represent and by their ability to discriminate between patients at different levels of the trait being assessed, in this case, negative mood. Finally, a hierarchical bifactor model where multiple subfactors are allowed to load on an overall factor was used to confirm that the items identified as representing a unidimensional item set explained the large majority of variance of the overall factor, providing additional support for essential unidimensionality. Using the final item bank, we constructed a computer adaptive test administration mode, and reduced item sets were selected to create short forms including items with the highest information (reliability) at targeted score levels of the trait being measured, while also considering clinical content. RESULTS: We identified a 12-item bank for assessment of negative mood; eight-item and four-item short-form versions were developed to reduce administrative burden. Computer adaptive test administration used a mean ± SD of 8 ± 1 items. The item bank's reliability (0 = no reliability; 1 = perfect reliability) was 0.89 for the computer adaptive test administration, 0.86 for the eight-item short form, and 0.71 for the four-item short form. Reliability values equal to or greater than 0.7 are considered acceptable for group level measures. Construct validity sufficient for clinical practice was supported by more severe negative mood scores among individuals with a previous episode of pain in the involved anatomical region, pain and activity limitations during the past 3 months, a work-related injury, education less than a college degree, and income less than or equal to USD 50,000. CONCLUSION: These newly derived tools include short-form and computer adaptive test options for reliable and valid negative mood assessment in outpatient orthopaedic populations. Future research should determine the responsiveness of these measures to change and establish score thresholds for clinical decision-making. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Orthopaedic providers can use these tools to inform prognosis, establish clinical benchmarks, and identify patients who may benefit from psychological and/or behavioral treatments.

Patient-centered outcomes: Domain importance predicts health care use following physical therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Identifying patients with musculoskeletal pain who are at risk for additional health care use is important for improving the value of physical therapists' services. We previously identified three subgroups based on the importance attached by patients to improvements in outcome domains including a (1) Pain and Function Outcomes Important subgroup; (2) Pain Important subgroup; and (3) Multiple Outcome Domains Important subgroup. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim was to determine whether subgroups based on patient-determined outcomes of importance predicted any additional pain-related health care use after an episode of physical therapy. A secondary aim was to determine if subgroup membership predicted use of specific services. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a longitudinal cohort. SETTING: Ambulatory outpatient physical therapy clinics. PATIENTS: Two hundred forty-six patients seeking physical therapy recruited from the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) cohort study. INTERVENTIONS: Patients completed a demographic and health history questionnaire, numeric pain rating scale, region-specific disability measure, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Subgroup membership was determined based on responses to the Patient Centered Outcome Questionnaire. At 1 year, patients reported use of health care since discharge from physical therapy. Separate logistic regression models determined whether subgroup membership predicted additional health care use. RESULTS: Compared to the Pain and Function Outcomes Important subgroup, the Pain Important subgroup had higher adjusted odds (95% confidence interval [CI]) for the primary outcome of any additional health care use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.47, 95% CI 1.01-6.00) and secondary outcomes of opioid use (aOR 9.45, 95% CI 2.87-31.17), injection (aOR 4.09, 95% CI 1.25-13.41), and surgery (aOR 5.10, 95% CI 1.15-22.67). There were no significant differences in health care utilization between the Pain and Function Outcomes Important and Multiple Outcome Domains Important subgroups. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, patients with a singular focus on pain improvements were at higher risk for additional health care, including opioid use, injection, and surgery. These findings are exploratory and need to be confirmed in other cohorts.

Heterogeneity of pain-related psychological distress in patients seeking care for shoulder pathology.

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress is associated with disability and quality of life for patients with shoulder pain. However, uncertainty around heterogeneity of psychological distress has limited the adoption of shoulder care models that address psychological characteristics. In a cohort of patients with shoulder pain, our study sought to (1) describe the prevalence of various subtypes of psychological distress; (2) evaluate associations between psychological distress and self-reported shoulder pain, disability, and function; and (3) determine differences in psychological distress profiles between patients receiving nonoperative vs. operative treatment. METHODS: The sample included 277 patients who were evaluated in clinic by a shoulder surgeon and completed the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome Yellow Flag Assessment Tool (OSPRO-YF) from 2019 to 2021. This tool categorizes maladaptive and adaptive psychological traits, and the number of yellow flags (YFs) ranges from 0 to 11, with higher YF counts indicating higher pain-related psychological distress. Operative and nonoperative cohorts were compared using χ2 test and Student t test. Linear regression was used to evaluate the association between pain, disability, and YFs, whereas Poisson regression evaluated the association between operative treatment and psychological distress. K-means cluster analysis was performed to propose potential psychological distress phenotypes. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one patients (91%) had at least 1 YF on the OSPRO-YF tool, with a mean number of 6 ± 3.5 YFs. YFs in unhelpful coping (85%) and helpful coping domains (78%) were most prevalent. The number of YFs was significantly associated with baseline shoulder pain (P < .001), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P < .001), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (P < .001) scores. Comparing operative and nonoperative cohorts, the operative cohort had a significantly higher mean number of YFs (6.5 vs. 5.6, P = .035), presence of any YF (94.3% vs. 85.7%, P = .015), and presence of YFs within the unhelpful coping domain (91.8% vs. 75.6%, P < .001). Three phenotypes were described, corresponding to low, moderate, and severe psychological distress (P < .001), with females (P = .037) and smokers (P = .018) associated with higher psychological distress phenotypes. CONCLUSIONS: YFs, particularly within the unhelpful coping and helpful coping domains, were highly prevalent in a cohort of patients presenting to a shoulder surgeon's clinic. Additionally, operative patients were found to have a significantly higher rate of YFs across multiple dimensions of psychological distress. These findings stress the importance of routine attentiveness to multiple dimensions of pain-related psychological distress in shoulder populations, which can provide an opportunity to reinforce healthy interpretation of pain while minimizing distress in appropriately identified patients.

Screening for Yellow Flags in Orthopaedic Physical Therapy: A Clinical Framework.

BACKGROUND: Psychological factors influence or are associated with physical function, pain, and health care costs among individuals with musculoskeletal pain conditions. Recent clinical practice guidelines recommend screening for psychological factors (also referred to as "yellow flags") in physical therapy practice to help understand prognosis and inform shared decision making for treatment. CLINICAL QUESTION: Despite the urgings of clinical practice guidelines and evidence of the influence of psychological factors on clinical outcomes, screening for yellow flags is uncommon in clinical practice. Clinicians may feel uncertain about how to integrate screening tools into clinical practice, and how screening results might inform decision making and care coordination. KEY RESULTS: We outline a 3-step framework for routine yellow flag screening in physical therapy practice: (1) establish a standard first-line screening instrument and process, (2) interpret the results to inform shared decision making, and (3) monitor treatment progress. Four case examples illustrate how yellow flag screening can help clinicians and patients decide whether the patient might benefit most from standard physical therapy, psychologically informed physical therapy, psychologically informed physical therapy with referral to another health care provider, or immediate referral. CLINICAL APPLICATION: Consider incorporating a standard yellow flag screening process into usual musculoskeletal health care. We present a framework to guide yellow flag screening in practice (1) to help inform treatment pathway selection and (2) to enhance interdisciplinary communication. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(9):459-469. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10570.

What General and Pain-associated Psychological Distress Phenotypes Exist Among Patients with Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis?

BACKGROUND: Psychological distress can negatively influence disability, quality of life, and treatment outcomes for individuals with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). Clinical practice guidelines recommend a comprehensive disease management approach to OA that includes the identification, evaluation, and management of psychological distress. However, uncertainty around the best psychological screening and assessment methods, a poor understanding of the heterogeneity of psychological distress in those with OA, and lack of guidance on how to scale treatment have limited the growth of OA care models that effectively address individual psychological needs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Across which general and pain-related psychological distress constructs do individuals seeking conservative care for hip or knee OA report higher scores than the general population of individuals seeking conservative care for musculoskeletal pain conditions? (2) What common psychological phenotypes exist among nonsurgical care-seeking individuals with hip or knee OA? METHODS: The sample included participants from the Duke Joint Health Program (n = 1239), a comprehensive hip and knee OA care program, and the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) cohort studies (n = 871) comprising individuals seeking conservative care for knee, shoulder, low back, or neck pain. At the initial evaluation, patients completed the OSPRO Yellow Flag (OSPRO-YF) Assessment Tool, which assesses 11 general and pain-related psychological distress constructs (depression, anxiety, fear of movement, self-efficacy for managing one's own pain). We used OSPRO-YF scores to compare levels of psychological distress between the cohorts. Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated to determine the magnitude of differences between the groups, with d = 0.20, d = 0.50, and d = 0.80 indicating small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively. We used a latent class analysis to derive psychological distress phenotypes in people with OA based on the 11 OSPRO-YF psychological distress indicators. Psychological distress phenotypes are characterized by specific mood, belief, and behavioral factors that differentiate subgroups within a population. Phenotyping can help providers develop scalable treatment pathways that are better tailored to the common needs of patients. RESULTS: Patients with OA demonstrated higher levels of general and pain-related psychological distress across all psychological constructs except for trait anxiety (that is, anxiety level as a personal characteristic rather than as a response to a stressful situation, like surgery) with small-to-moderate effect sizes. Characteristics with the largest effect sizes in the OA and overall OSPRO cohort were (Cohen's d) general anxiety (-0.66, lower in the OA cohort), pain catastrophizing (the tendency to ruminate over, maginfiy, or feel helpless about a pain experience, 0.47), kinesiophobia (pain-related fear of movement, 0.46), pain self-efficacy (confidence in one's own ability to manage his or her pain, -0.46, lower in the OA cohort), and self-efficacy for rehabilitation (confidence in one's own ability to perform their rehabilitation treatments, -0.44, lower in the OA cohort). The latent class analysis yielded four phenotypes (% sample): high distress (52%, 647 of 1239), low distress (26%, 322 of 1239), low self-efficacy and acceptance (low confidence in managing and willingness to accept pain) (15%, 186 of 1239), and negative pain coping (exhibiting poor pain coping skills) (7%, 84 of 1239). The classification error rate was near zero (2%), and the median of posterior probabilities used to assign subgroup membership was 0.99 (interquartile range 0.98 to 1.00), both indicating excellent model performance. The high-distress group had the lowest mean age (61 ± 11 years) and highest levels of pain intensity (6 ± 2) and disability (HOOS JR: 50 ± 15; KOOS JR: 47 ± 15), whereas the low-distress group had the highest mean age (63 ± 10 years) and lowest levels of pain (4 ± 2) and disability (HOOS JR: 63 ± 15; KOOS JR: 60 ± 12). However, none of these differences met or exceeded anchor-based minimal clinically important difference thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: General and pain-related psychological distress are common among individuals seeking comprehensive care for hip or knee OA. Predominant existing OA care models that focus on biomedical interventions, such as corticosteroid injection or joint replacement that are designed to directly address underlying joint pathology and inflammation, may be inadequate to fully meet the care-related needs of many patients with OA due to their underlying psychological distress. We believe this because biomedical interventions do not often address psychological characteristics, which are known to influence OA-related pain and disability independent of joint pathology. Healthcare providers can develop new comprehensive hip and knee OA treatment pathways tailored to these phenotypes where services such as pain coping skills training, relaxation training, and psychological therapies are delivered to patients who exhibit phenotypes characterized by high distress or negative pain coping. Future studies should evaluate whether tailoring treatment to specific psychological phenotypes yields better clinical outcomes than nontailored treatments, or treatments that have a more biomedical focus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Prediction of healthcare utilization following an episode of physical therapy for musculoskeletal pain.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, value-based purchasing has created the need for healthcare systems to prospectively identify patients at risk for high healthcare utilization beyond a physical therapy episode for musculoskeletal pain. The purpose of this study was to determine predictors of pain-related healthcare utilization subsequent to an index episode of physical therapy for musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: This study assessed data from the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) longitudinal cohort study that recruited individuals with a primary complaint of neck, low back, knee or shoulder pain in physical therapy (n = 440). Demographics, health-related information, review of systems, comorbidity and pain-related psychological distress measures were collected at baseline evaluation. Baseline to 4-week changes in pain intensity, disability, and pain-related psychological distress were measured as treatment response variables. At 6-months and 1-year after baseline evaluation, individuals reported use of opioids, injection, surgery, diagnostic tests or imaging, and emergency room visits for their pain condition over the follow-up period. Separate prediction models were developed for any subsequent care and service-specific utilization. RESULTS: Subsequent pain-related healthcare utilization was reported by 43% (n = 106) of the study sample that completed the 12-month follow-up (n = 246). Baseline disability and 4-week change in pain intensity were important global predictors of subsequent healthcare utilization. Age, insurance status, comorbidity burden, baseline pain, and 4-week changes in pain intensity, disability and pain-related psychological distress predicted specific service utilization. CONCLUSION: In those completing follow up measures, risk of additional pain-related healthcare utilization after physical therapy was best predicted by baseline characteristics and 4-week treatment response variables for pain intensity, disability and pain-related psychological distress. These findings suggest treatment monitoring of specific response variables could enhance identification of those at risk for future healthcare utilization in addition to baseline assessment. Further study is required to determine how specific characteristics of the clinical encounter influence future utilization.

The Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) in patients with musculoskeletal pain conditions: a longitudinal validation cohort from the USA.

PURPOSE: There is an increased need for determining which patients with musculoskeletal pain benefit from additional diagnostic testing or psychologically informed intervention. The Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) cohort studies were designed to develop and validate standard assessment tools for review of systems and yellow flags. This cohort profile paper provides a description of and future plans for the validation cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=440) with primary complaint of spine, shoulder or knee pain were recruited into the OSPRO validation cohort via a national Orthopaedic Physical Therapy-Investigative Network. Patients were followed up at 4 weeks, 6 months and 12 months for pain, functional status and quality of life outcomes. Healthcare utilisation outcomes were also collected at 6 and 12 months. FINDINGS TO DATE: There are no longitudinal findings reported to date from the ongoing OSPRO validation cohort. The previously completed cross-sectional OSPRO development cohort yielded two assessment tools that were investigated in the validation cohort. FUTURE PLANS: Follow-up data collection was completed in January 2017. Primary analyses will investigate how accurately the OSPRO review of systems and yellow flag tools predict 12-month pain, functional status, quality of life and healthcare utilisation outcomes. Planned secondary analyses include prediction of pain interference and/or development of chronic pain, investigation of treatment expectation on patient outcomes and analysis of patient satisfaction following an episode of physical therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The OSPRO validation cohort was not registered.

Low- Versus High-Intensity Plyometric Exercise During Rehabilitation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Plyometric exercise is used during rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to facilitate the return to sports participation. However, clinical outcomes have not been examined, and high loads on the lower extremity could be detrimental to knee articular cartilage. PURPOSE: To compare the immediate effect of low- and high-intensity plyometric exercise during rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction on knee function, articular cartilage metabolism, and other clinically relevant measures. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Twenty-four patients who underwent unilateral ACL reconstruction (mean, 14.3 weeks after surgery; range, 12.1-17.7 weeks) were assigned to 8 weeks (16 visits) of low- or high-intensity plyometric exercise consisting of running, jumping, and agility activities. Groups were distinguished by the expected magnitude of vertical ground-reaction forces. Testing was conducted before and after the intervention. Primary outcomes were self-reported knee function (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective knee form) and a biomarker of articular cartilage degradation (urine concentrations of crosslinked C-telopeptide fragments of type II collagen [uCTX-II]). Secondary outcomes included additional biomarkers of articular cartilage metabolism (urinary concentrations of the neoepitope of type II collagen cleavage at the C-terminal three-quarter-length fragment [uC2C], serum concentrations of the C-terminal propeptide of newly formed type II collagen [sCPII]) and inflammation (tumor necrosis factor-α), functional performance (maximal vertical jump and single-legged hop), knee impairments (anterior knee laxity, average knee pain intensity, normalized quadriceps strength, quadriceps symmetry index), and psychosocial status (kinesiophobia, knee activity self-efficacy, pain catastrophizing). The change in each measure was compared between groups. Values before and after the intervention were compared with the groups combined. RESULTS: The groups did not significantly differ in the change of any primary or secondary outcome measure. Of interest, sCPII concentrations tended to change in opposite directions (mean ± SD: low-intensity group, 28.7 ± 185.5 ng/mL; high-intensity group, -200.6 ± 255.0 ng/mL; P = .097; Cohen d = 1.03). Across groups, significant changes after the intervention were increased the IKDC score, vertical jump height, normalized quadriceps strength, quadriceps symmetry index, and knee activity self-efficacy and decreased average knee pain intensity. CONCLUSION: No significant differences were detected between the low- and high-intensity plyometric exercise groups. Across both groups, plyometric exercise induced positive changes in knee function, knee impairments, and psychosocial status that would support the return to sports participation after ACL reconstruction. The effect of plyometric exercise intensity on articular cartilage requires further evaluation. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01851655.

Development of a Review-of-Systems Screening Tool for Orthopaedic Physical Therapists: Results From the Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome (OSPRO) Cohort.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature review and cross-sectional study. BACKGROUND: Direct access to physical therapy necessitates greater responsibility to determine appropriateness of care by recognizing the potential for concomitant disease or systemic involvement. Recent research has identified excessive variability in the reporting of red flag symptoms. An initial step to improve the identification of red flag symptoms is the development of a standardized screening tool. OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of a review-of-systems screening tool appropriate for use by orthopaedic physical therapists. METHODS: First, a red flag symptom item bank was compiled from a systematic literature review to allow for further psychometric testing and development of a screening tool. Second, physical therapists in 11 outpatient clinics recruited patients presenting with primary complaints of neck, shoulder, low back, or knee pain. Patients completed the red flag symptom item bank and standard questionnaires for comorbidities, negative mood, quality of life, pain, and function. The development of the screening tool involved identifying and combining different 3-item sets that characterized the highest number of patients reporting at least 1 positive symptom response (operationally defined as "red flag symptom responder"). RESULTS: The literature search yielded 103 studies that met the inclusion criteria, and the final item bank consisted of 97 items representing 8 body systems. Four hundred thirty-one patients with primary complaints of neck (n = 93), shoulder (n = 108), low back (n = 119), or knee (n = 111) disorders contributed to the cross-sectional study. The number of red flag symptom responders was 393 of 431 (91.2%). These patients were older, more likely to be female, had lower income, and were more likely to report neck or back pain (all, P<.05). A 10-item review-of-systems screening tool correctly identified 372 of 393 (94.7%) responders, and a 23-item version identified all 393 (100%) responders. The review-of-systems screening tools and the complete 97-item bank had similar correlations with concurrent clinical measures, except for depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: Concise red flag symptom identification appears to be feasible in outpatient orthopaedic physical therapy settings. Future research will determine how this review-of-systems screening tool needs refinement for different patient populations and whether it predicts clinical outcomes or the need for referral to other providers.

Comparison of physical impairment, functional, and psychosocial measures based on fear of reinjury/lack of confidence and return-to-sport status after ACL reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Fear of reinjury and lack of confidence influence return-to-sport outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The physical, psychosocial, and functional recovery of patients reporting fear of reinjury or lack of confidence as their primary barrier to resuming sports participation is unknown. PURPOSE: To compare physical impairment, functional, and psychosocial measures between subgroups based on return-to-sport status and fear of reinjury/lack of confidence in the return-to-sport stage and to determine the association of physical impairment and psychosocial measures with function for each subgroup at 6 months and 1 year after surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Physical impairment (quadriceps index [QI], quadriceps strength/body weight [QSBW], hamstring:quadriceps strength ratio [HQ ratio], pain intensity), self-report of function (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC]), and psychosocial (Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia-shortened form [TSK-11]) measures were collected at 6 months and 1 year after surgery in 73 patients with ACL reconstruction. At 1 year, subjects were divided into "return-to-sport" (YRTS) or "not return-to-sport" (NRTS) subgroups based on their self-reported return to preinjury sport status. Patients in the NRTS subgroup were subcategorized as NRTS-Fear/Confidence if fear of reinjury/lack of confidence was the primary reason for not returning to sports, and all others were categorized as NRTS-Other. RESULTS: A total of 46 subjects were assigned to YRTS, 13 to NRTS-Other, and 14 to NRTS-Fear/Confidence. Compared with the YRTS subgroup, the NRTS-Fear/Confidence subgroup was older and had lower QSBW, lower IKDC score, and higher TSK-11 score at 6 months and 1 year; however, they had similar pain levels. In the NRTS-Fear/Confidence subgroup, the IKDC score was associated with QSBW and pain at 6 months and QSBW, QI, pain, and TSK-11 scores at 1 year. CONCLUSION: Elevated pain-related fear of movement/reinjury, quadriceps weakness, and reduced IKDC score distinguish patients who are unable to return to preinjury sports participation because of fear of reinjury/lack of confidence. Despite low average pain ratings, fear of pain may influence function in this subgroup. Assessment of fear of reinjury, quadriceps strength, and self-reported function at 6 months may help identify patients at risk for not returning to sports at 1 year and should be considered for inclusion in return-to-sport guidelines.

Analysis of shortened versions of the tampa scale for kinesiophobia and pain catastrophizing scale for patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Recent work suggests that psychological influence on pain intensity and knee function should be considered for patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) and Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) have been used to determine psychological influence in these patients. However, TSK and PCS factor structures have not been described for patients with ACLR. This study investigated 2 groups of patients post-ACLR to determine if the use of shortened questionnaires is warranted. METHODS: Cross-sectional study in which patients completed measures during early (n=105, median days from surgery=56.0) and late (n=184, median days from surgery=195.0) postoperative phases of ACLR rehabilitation. RESULTS: Shortened questionnaires for fear of pain, fear of injury, and somatic focus were generated for the TSK-11. A shortened questionnaire for magnification/helplessness and rumination was generated for the PCS in the late group only. There were minimal differences in the shortened questionnaires for clinical subgroups based on sex, ACLR graft type, method of injury, or nature of injury. Correlation and regression analyses suggested a shortened version of the TSK-11 for fear of injury was appropriate for use in the early postoperative phase, whereas the original TSK-11 scale may be appropriate for use in the late postoperative phase. There were no shortened versions of the PCS for consideration in the early postoperative phase, but a shortened version for magnification/helplessness was appropriate for use in the late postoperative phase. DISCUSSION: Shortened versions of the TSK-11 and PCS may be appropriate for ACLR populations, depending on the postoperative phase. These data may guide future research of psychological factors in ACLR populations so that levels predictive of risk for developing chronic pain and/or inability to return to pre-injury activity levels can be determined.

Longitudinal changes in psychosocial factors and their association with knee pain and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Evidence in the musculoskeletal rehabilitation literature suggests that psychosocial factors can influence pain levels and functional outcome. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine changes in select psychosocial factors and their association with knee pain and function over 12 weeks after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. DESIGN: This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational study. METHODS: Patients with ACL reconstruction completed self-report questionnaires for average knee pain intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]), knee function (International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form [IKDC-SKF]), and psychosocial factors (pain catastrophizing [Pain Catastrophizing Scale], fear of movement or reinjury [shortened version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11)], and self-efficacy for rehabilitation tasks [modified Self-Efficacy for Rehabilitation Outcome Scale (SER)]). Data were collected at 4 time points after surgery (baseline and 4, 8, and 12 weeks). Repeated-measures analyses of variance determined changes in questionnaire scores across time. Hierarchical linear regression models were used to examine the association of psychosocial factors with knee pain and function. RESULTS: Seventy-seven participants completed the study. All questionnaire scores changed across 12 weeks. Baseline psychosocial factors did not predict the 12-week NRS or IKDC-SKF score. The 12-week change in modified SER score predicted the 12-week change in NRS score (r(2)=.061), and the 12-week change in modified SER and TSK-11 scores predicted the 12-week change in IKDC-SKF score (r(2)=.120). LIMITATIONS: The psychometric properties of the psychosocial factor questionnaires are unknown in people with ACL reconstruction. The study focused on short-term outcomes using only self-report measures. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial factors are potentially modifiable early after ACL reconstruction. Baseline psychosocial factor levels did not predict knee pain or function 12 weeks postoperatively. Interventions that increase self-efficacy for rehabilitation tasks or decrease fear of movement or reinjury may have potential to improve short-term outcomes for knee pain and function.

The association of pain and fear of movement/reinjury with function during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction rehabilitation.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. OBJECTIVES: To measure fear of movement/reinjury levels and determine the association with function at different timeframes during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction rehabilitation. We hypothesized that fear of movement/reinjury would decrease during rehabilitation and be inversely related with function. BACKGROUND: Fear of movement/reinjury can prevent return to sports after ACL reconstruction, but it has not been studied during rehabilitation. METHODS AND MEASURES: Demographic data and responses on the shortened version of Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-11), 8-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-8), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective form were extracted from a clinical database for 97 patients in the first year after ACL reconstruction. Three groups were formed: group 1, less than or equal to 90 days; group 2, 91 to 180 days; group 3: 181 to 372 days post-ACL reconstruction. Group differences in TSK-11 score, SF-8 bodily pain rating, and IKDC scores were determined. Hierarchical linear regression models were created for each group, with IKDC score as the dependent variable and demographic factors, SF-8 bodily pain rating, and TSK-11 score as independent variables. RESULTS: TSK-11 score was higher in group 1 than in group 3 (P < .05). Across the groups, SF-8 bodily pain rating decreased (P < .001) and IKDC score increased (P < .001). SF-8 bodily pain rating was a significant factor in the regression model for all groups, whereas TSK-11 score only contributed to the regression model in group 3 (partial correlation, -0.529). CONCLUSIONS: Pain was consistently associated with function across the timeframes studied. Fear of movement/reinjury levels appear to decrease during ACL reconstruction rehabilitation and are associated with function in the timeframe when patients return to sports. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognosis, level 4.