Adolescents with prior patellar dislocation report affected quality of life and function, as measured using the Banff Patella Instability Instrument, Kujala and EQ-5D-5L index scores.

PURPOSE: We aimed to establish patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) reference data for a cohort of patients with prior patellar dislocation without previous knee surgery. METHODS: All inhabitants of the Faroe Islands aged 15-19 years were sent an online survey via secure email to establish a national cohort. They were asked to answer questions regarding demographics, whether they had prior patellar dislocation and to complete the PROMs: the Banff Patella Instability Instrument (BPII), Kujala, Marx activity and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Participants who had undergone knee surgery were excluded. Participants who had prior patellar dislocation underwent radiographic examinations to diagnose trochlear dysplasia. The study included three cohorts: the general population, prior patellar dislocation and prior patellar dislocation and trochlear dysplasia cohorts. RESULTS: Of the 3749 individuals contacted, 1119 completed the survey and responded to at least one PROM. Of these, 102 reported a history of patellar dislocation and 57 of them had trochlear dysplasia. All PROMs, except the Marx score, reflected a worse quality of life and function after patellar dislocation than in the general population cohort; this was most pronounced in the BPII. The percentage of people experiencing problems in EQ-5D-5L dimensions was higher in the patellar dislocation and trochlear dysplasia cohorts than in the general population cohort in all EQ-5D-5L domains, except anxiety/depression. CONCLUSION: Adolescents who had patellar dislocation reported reduced quality of life and function according to the BPII, Kujala and EQ-5D-5L index values, as well as all EQ-5D-5L domains, except for anxiety/depression. However, their activity levels remained high. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Preoperative Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Polymerase Chain Reaction Test at Between 48 and 72 Hours Preoperatively is Safe for Patients Undergoing Primary and Revision Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicentre International Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing lower limb arthroplasty who are severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive at the time of surgery have a high risk of mortality. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Care Excellence and the British Orthopaedic Association advise self-isolation for 14 days preoperatively in patients at a high risk of adverse outcomes due to COVID-19. The aim of the study is to assess whether preoperative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 could be performed at between 48 and 72 hours preoperatively with specific advice about minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 restricted to between PCR and admission. METHODS: A multicentre, international, observational cohort study of 1,000 lower limb arthroplasty cases was performed. The dual primary outcomes were 30-day conversion to SARS-CoV-2 positive and 30-day SARS-CoV-2 mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day SARS-CoV-2 morbidity. RESULTS: Of the 1,000 cases, 935 (94%) had a PCR between 48 and 72 hours preoperatively. All cases were admitted to and had surgery through a COVID-free pathway. Primary knee arthroplasty was performed in 41% of cases, primary hip arthroplasty in 40%, revision knee arthroplasty in 11%, and revision hip arthroplasty in 9%. Six percent of operations were emergency operations. No cases of SARS-CoV-2 were identified within the first 30 days. CONCLUSION: Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test between 48 and 72 hours preoperatively with advice about minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 restricted to between PCR and admission in conjunction with a COVID-free pathway is safe for patients undergoing primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty. Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test alone may be safe but further adequately powered studies are required. This information is important for shared decision making with patients during the current pandemic.

Interpretation threshold values for the Oxford Knee Score in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Developing meaningful thresholds for the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) advances its clinical use. We determined the minimal important change (MIC), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and treatment failure (TF) values as meaningful thresholds for the OKS at 3-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a cohort study with data from patients undergoing UKA collected at a hospital in Denmark between February 2016 and September 2021. The OKS was completed preoperatively and at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Interpretation threshold values were calculated with the anchor-based adjusted predictive modeling method. Non-parametric bootstrapping was used to derive 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Complete 3-, 12-, and 24-month postoperative data was obtained for 331 of 423 (78%), 340 of 479 (71%), and 235 of 338 (70%) patients, median age of 68-69 years (58-59% females). Adjusted OKS MIC values were 4.7 (CI 3.3-6.0), 7.1 (CI 5.2-8.6), and 5.4 (CI 3.4- 7.3), adjusted OKS PASS values were 28.9 (CI 27.6-30.3), 32.7 (CI 31.5-33.9), and 31.3 (CI 29.1-33.3), and adjusted OKS TF values were 24.4 (CI 20.7-27.4), 29.3 (CI 27.3-31.1), and 28.5 (CI 26.0-30.5) at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. All values statistically significantly increased from 3 to 12 months but not from 12 to 24 months. INTERPRETATION: The UKA-specific measurement properties and clinical thresholds for the OKS can improve the interpretation of UKA outcome and assist quality assessment in institutional and national registries.

Assessing baseline dependency of anchor-based minimal important change (MIC): don't stratify on the baseline score!

PURPOSE: The minimal important change (MIC) of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) is often suspected to be baseline dependent, typically in the sense that patients who are in a poorer baseline health condition need greater improvement to qualify as minimally important. Testing MIC baseline dependency is commonly performed by creating two or more subgroups, stratified on the baseline PROM score. This study's purpose was to show that this practice produces biased subgroup MIC estimates resulting in spurious MIC baseline dependency, and to develop alternative methods to evaluate MIC baseline dependency. METHODS: Datasets with PROM baseline and follow-up scores and transition ratings were simulated with and without MIC baseline dependency. Mean change MICs, ROC-based MICs, predictive MICs, and adjusted MICs were estimated before and after stratification on the baseline score. Three alternative methods were developed and evaluated. The methods were applied in a real data example for illustration. RESULTS: Baseline stratification resulted in biased subgroup MIC estimates and the false impression of MIC baseline dependency, due to redistribution of measurement error. Two of the alternative methods require a second baseline measurement with the same PROM or another correlated PROM. The third method involves the construction of two parallel tests based on splitting the PROM's item set. Two methods could be applied to the real data. CONCLUSION: MIC baseline dependency should not be tested in subgroups based on stratification on the baseline PROM score. Instead, one or more of the suggested alternative methods should be used.

Which Oxford Knee Score level represents a satisfactory symptom state after undergoing a total knee replacement?

Background and purpose - Meaningful interpretation of postoperative Oxford Knee Score (OKS) levels is challenging. We established Patient Acceptable Symptoms State (PASS) and Treatment Failure (TF) values for the OKS in patients undergoing primary total knee replacement (TKR) in Denmark.Patients and methods - Data from patients undergoing primary TKR between February 2015 and January 2019 was extracted from the arthroplasty registry at the Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre in Denmark. Data included 3, 12, and 24 months postoperative responses to the OKS and 2 anchor questions asking whether they considered their symptom state to be satisfactory, and if not, whether they considered the treatment to have failed. PASS and TF threshold values were calculated using the adjusted predictive modeling method. Non-parametric bootstrapping was used to derive 95% confidence intervals (CI).Results - Complete 3, 12, and 24 months postoperative data was obtained for 187 of 209 (89%), 884 of 915 (97%), and 575 of 586 (98%) patients, with median ages from 68 to 70 years (59 to 64% female). 72%, 77%, and 79% considered as having satisfactory symptoms, while 6%, 11%, and 11% considered the treatment to have failed, at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. OKS PASS values (CI) were 27 (26-28), 30 (29-31), and 30 (29-31) at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. TF values were 27 (26-28) and 27 (26-29) at 12 and 24 months postoperatively.Interpretation - The OKS PASS values can be used to guide the interpretation of TKR outcome and support quality assessment in institutional and national registries.

The Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the Harris Hip Score Following Total Hip Arthroplasty: Validated Thresholds at 3-Month, 1-, 3-, 5-, and 7-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: The Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) represents the value on a patient-reported outcome measure scale beyond which patients consider themselves well or in a satisfactory state. The aim of this study is to define and validate the PASS threshold for the HHS at 3 months, 1, 3, 5, and 7 years after THA. METHODS: A total of 976 patients from 14 centers in 7 countries were enrolled into a prospective study. Patients completed the HHS and a numerical rating scale for satisfaction at each follow-up. PASS thresholds for the HHS were calculated at each follow-up interval using the anchor-based, 80% specificity method. A bootstrapping method was used to internally validate the primary PASS thresholds. A patient sample sourced from an institutional registry was used for external validation. RESULTS: The HHS was an excellent predictor of satisfaction at each time point (area under the curve > 0.8; P < .001). PASS thresholds for the HHS were 76 points at 3 months, 89 points at 1 year, 93 points at 3 years, 94 points at 5 years, and 93 points at 7 years. When applied to the internal and external validation cohorts, all PASS thresholds showed acceptable or excellent ability to predict satisfaction (area under the curve = 0.73-80; P < .001). CONCLUSION: The present study is the first to present validated PASS thresholds for the HHS following THA. These findings will serve as a useful reference for future THA outcome studies and as benchmarks for surgeons in their assessment of their patients' clinical success.

Changes in Patient Satisfaction Following Total Joint Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim is to identify the degree to which patient satisfaction with the outcome of total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) changes between 1 and 3 years from the procedure. The secondary aim is to identify variables associated with satisfaction. METHODS: Data were sourced from 2 prospective international, multicenter studies (919 THA and 450 TKA patients). Satisfaction was assessed by a 10-point numerical rating scale, at 1- and 3-year follow-up. Linear mixed-effects models were used to assess factors associated with satisfaction. RESULTS: For the THA cohort, higher preoperative joint space width (odds ratio [OR] = 0.28; P = .004), pain from other joints (OR = 0.26; P = .033), and lower preoperative health state (OR = -0.02; P < .001) were associated with consistently lower levels of satisfaction. The model also showed that patients with preoperative anxiety/depression improved in satisfaction between 1 and 3 years (OR = -0.26; P = .031). For the TKA cohort, anterior (vs neutral or posterior) tibial component slope (OR = 0.90; P = .008), greater femoral component valgus angle (OR = 0.05; P = .012), less severe osteoarthritis (OR = -0.10; P < .001), and lower preoperative health state (OR = -0.02; P = .003) were associated with lower levels of satisfaction across the study period. In addition, patients with anterior tibial component slope improved in satisfaction level over time (OR = -0.33; P = .022). CONCLUSION: Changes in satisfaction following THA and TKA are rare between 1- and 3-year follow-up. The findings of this study can be used to guide patient counseling preoperatively and to determine intervals of routine follow-up postoperatively.

Patients report inferior quality of care for knee osteoarthritis prior to assessment for knee replacement surgery - a cross-sectional study of 517 patients in Denmark.

Background and purpose - Clinical care pathways for knee osteoarthritis (OA) are not always in line with clinical guidelines. We investigated (1) the patient-perceived quality of OA management, (2) which physiotherapist-delivered treatments patients with knee OA have attempted, and (3) patients' expected subsequent treatment, at the time of referral to an orthopedic surgeon.Patients and methods - This cross-sectional study included all patients with scheduled first-time appointments for knee OA at an orthopedic outpatient clinic from April 2017 to February 2018. Postal questionnaires included the 16-item OsteoArthritis Quality Indicator (OA-QI) questionnaire and questions about physiotherapist-delivered treatment for knee OA.Results - 517 of 627 (82%) eligible patients responded. Responders' (63% female) mean age was 67 years. The mean pass rate for the 16 independent quality indicators was 32% (8-74%). Sub-grouped into 4 categories, pass rates for independent quality indicators ranged from 16-52% regarding information, 9-50% regarding pain and functional assessment, 8-35% regarding referrals, and 16-74% regarding pharmacological treatment. While half of responders felt informed of physical activity benefits, only one-third had consulted a physiotherapist during the past year. Commonest physiotherapist-delivered treatments were exercise therapy for 22% and participation in the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D) program for12% of responding patients. 65% expected surgery as subsequent treatment.Interpretation - Patients with knee OA are undertreated in primary care in Denmark; however, our findings may only reflect healthcare settings that are comparably organized. Our results call for better structure and uniform pathways for primary care knee OA treatment before referral to an orthopedic surgeon.

Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement.

Background and purpose - Interpreting changes in Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) following total knee replacement (TKR) is challenged by the lack of methodologically rigorous methods to estimate minimal important change (MIC) values. We determined MIC values by predictive modeling for the OKS and FJS in patients undergoing primary TKR. Patients and methods - We conducted a prospective cohort study in patients undergoing TKR between January 2015 and July 2016. OKS and FJS were completed preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively, accompanied by a 7-point anchor question ranging from "better, an important improvement" to "worse, an important worsening." MIC improvement values were defined with the predictive modeling approach based on logistic regression, with patients' decisions on important improvement as dependent variable and change in OKS/FJS as independent variable. Furthermore, the MICs were adjusted for high proportions of improved patients. Results - 333/496 (67.1%) patients with a median age of 69 years (61% female) had complete data for OKS, FJS, and anchor questions at 1 year postoperatively. 85% were importantly improved. Spearman's correlations between the anchor and the change score were 0.56 for OKS, and 0.61 for FJS. Adjusted predictive MIC values (95% CI) for improvement were 8 (6-9) for OKS and 14 (10-18) for FJS. Interpretation - The MIC value of 8 for OKS and 14 for FJS corresponds to minimal improvements that the average patient finds important and aids in our understanding of whether improvements after TKR are clinically relevant.

Minimal important change thresholds change over time after knee and hip arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVES: The minimal important change (MIC) reflects what patients, on average, consider the smallest improvement in a score that is important to them. MIC thresholds may vary across patient populations, interventions used, posttreatment time points and derivation methods. We determine and compare MIC thresholds for the Oxford Knee Score and Oxford Hip Score (OKS/OHS) at 3 months postoperatively to 12- and 24-month thresholds in patients undergoing knee or hip arthroplasty. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This cohort study used data from patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA), unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), or total hip arthroplasty (THA) at a public hospital between February 2016 and February 2023. At 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, patients responded to the OKS/OHS and a 7-point anchor question determining experienced changes in knee or hip pain and functional limitations. We used the adjusted predictive modeling method that accounts for the proportion improved and the reliability of the anchor question to determine MIC thresholds and their mean differences between time points. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained from 695/957 (73%), 1179/1703 (69%), and 1080/1607 (67%) patients undergoing TKA, 474/610 (78%), 438/603 (73%), and 355/507 (70%) patients undergoing UKA, and 965/1315 (73%), 978/1409 (69%), and 1059/1536 (69%) patients undergoing THA at 3, 12, and 24 months, respectively. The median age ranged from 68 to 70 years and 55% to 60% were females. The proportions improved ranged between 83% and 95%. The OKS/OHS MIC thresholds were 0.1, 4.2, and 5.1 for TKA, 1.8, 5.6, and 3.4 for UKA, and 1.3, 6.1, and 6.0 for THA at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. The reliability ranged between 0.64 and 0.82, and the MIC values increased between three and 12 months but not between 12 and 24 months. CONCLUSION: Any absence of deterioration in pain and function is considered important at 3 months after knee or hip arthroplasty. Increasing thresholds over time suggest patients raise their standards for what constitutes a minimal important improvement over the first postoperative year. Besides improving our understanding of patients' views on postoperative outcomes, these clinical thresholds may aid in interpreting registry-based treatment outcome evaluations.

Resistance training in patients with limb-girdle and becker muscular dystrophies.

INTRODUCTION: In this study we investigated the effect of strength training in patients with limb-girdle muscular dystrophy (LGMD) and Becker muscular dystrophy (BMD). METHODS: In 2 studies we compared the effect of low-intensity training (LOIT; n = 8) and high-intensity training (HIT; n = 4) in muscles of the upper and lower extremities. Patients were tested for maximal strength and endurance before and after the training program. RESULTS: LOIT training over 6 months resulted in increased biceps strength and endurance. HIT training increased endurance and strength in wrist flexion and extension and in elbow flexion. One patient discontinued HIT training due to muscle soreness and mildly increased plasma CK levels without strength deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: Both LOIT and HIT increased muscle strength and endurance in some of the muscles tested and were well tolerated in most patients. Our findings suggest that supervised resistance training may be considered in the management of patients with LGMD2 and BMD.

Interpretation Threshold Values for the Oxford Hip Score in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty: Advancing Their Clinical Use.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures such as the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) can capture patient-centered perspectives on outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The OHS assesses hip pain and functional limitations, but defining interpretation threshold values for the OHS is warranted so that numerical OHS values can be translated into whether patients have experienced clinically meaningful changes. Therefore, we determined the minimal important change (MIC), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and treatment failure (TF) threshold values for the OHS at 12 and 24-month follow-up in patients undergoing THA. METHODS: This cohort study used data from patients undergoing THA at 1 public hospital between July 2016 and April 2021. At 12 and 24 months postoperatively, patients provided responses for the OHS and for 3 anchor questions about whether they had experienced changes in hip pain and function, whether they considered their symptom state to be satisfactory, and if it was not satisfactory, whether they considered the treatment to have failed. The anchor-based adjusted predictive modeling method was used to determine interpretation threshold values. Baseline dependency was evaluated using a new item-split method. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to determine 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Complete data were obtained for 706 (69%) of 1,027 and 728 (66%) of 1,101 patients at 12 and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. These patients had a median age of 70 years, and 55% to 56% were female. Adjusted OHS MIC values were 6.3 (CI, 4.6 to 8.1) and 5.2 (CI, 3.6 to 6.7), adjusted OHS PASS values were 30.6 (CI, 29.0 to 32.2) and 30.5 (CI, 29.3 to 31.8), and adjusted OHS TF values were 25.5 (CI, 22.9 to 27.7) and 27.0 (CI, 25.2 to 28.8) at 12 and 24 months postoperatively, respectively. MIC values were 5.4 (CI, 2.1 to 9.1) and 5.0 (CI, 1.9 to 8.7) higher at 12 and 24 months, respectively, in patients with a more severe preoperative state. CONCLUSIONS: The established interpretation threshold values advance the interpretation and clinical use of the OHS, and may prove especially beneficial for registry-based evaluations of treatment quality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Interpretation threshold values for patient-reported outcomes in patients participating in a digitally delivered first-line treatment program for hip or knee osteoarthritis.

Objective: Establish proportions of patients reporting important improvement, acceptable symptoms and treatment failure and define interpretation threshold values for pain, patient-reported function and quality-of-life after participating in digital first-line treatment including education and exercise for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: Observational study. Responses to the pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS, 0-10 best to worst), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 12 (KOOS-12) and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score 12 (HOOS-12, both 0-100 worst to best) were obtained for 4383 (2987) and 2041 (1264) participants with knee (hip) OA at 3 and 12 months post intervention. Threshold values for Minimal Important Change (MIC), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and Treatment Failure (TF) were estimated using anchor-based predictive modeling. Results: 70-85% reported an important improvement in pain, function and quality of life after 3 and 12 months follow-up. 42% (3 months) and 51% (12 months) considered their current state as satisfactory, whereas 2-4% considered treatment failed. MIC values were -1 (NRS) and 0-4 (KOOS/HOOS-12) across follow-ups and joint affected. PASS threshold value for NRS was 3, and 53-73 for the KOOS/HOOS-12 subscales Corresponding values for TF were 5 (NRS) and 34-55 (KOOS/HOOS-12). Patients with more severe pain at baseline had higher MIC scores and accepted poorer outcomes at follow-ups. Conclusion: Threshold estimates aid in the interpretation of outcomes after first-line OA interventions assessed with NRS Pain and KOOS/HOOS-12. Baseline pain severity is important to consider when interpreting threshold values after first-line interventions in these patients.

Consequences for preoperative pain and function when postponing elective knee and hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: The coronavirus outbreak causes postponement of elective surgery. We evaluated how pain, function and general health were impacted by postponing elective knee and hip arthroplasty in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis with no known surgery rescheduling date due to the coronavirus outbreak. METHODS: This study included 194 patients from a Danish public hospital with postponed elective primary knee or hip arthroplasty due to the lockdown. Patients responded to questionnaires when their surgery was cancelled and before surgery. Changes in pain and function were evaluated with the Oxford Knee and Hip Scores (OKS, OHS) and their general health with the EuroQol 5-dimension scale (EQ5D). Additionally, we asked about the patients' concerns and whether they felt improved, unchanged or deteriorated during the waiting period. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained for 110 (57%) patients, 59 and 51 awaiting knee or hip arthroplasty (median age 71 years, 62% were female), respectively. Arthroplasty was postponed for a median (range) 98 (63-161) days. A total of 34% were concerned that the postponement would lead to a poorer outcome. Mean OKS and OHS differences were 0 (95% confidence interval (CI): -1-1) and -1 (95% CI: -2-0) from surgery cancellation to re-scheduled surgery. The mean EQ5D index difference was 0.0 (95% CI: 0.0-0.1) for both groups. A total of 75 (68%) patients felt an important deterioration of their condition. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operatively, patients worried about experiencing an altered treatment outcome due to postponed surgery and felt that their condition had deteriorated during the waiting period although this was not reflected in patient-reported outcome measures. FUNDING: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.

External Validation of Achieving the Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the EuroQol-5 Dimension 1 Year After Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for the EuroQol-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire have been established for patients being evaluated 1 year following total hip arthroplasty (THA) but with varying derivation cohorts and methods. The aim of this study was to (1) generate an EQ-5D PASS threshold 1 year following THA on the basis of an international patient cohort, (2) validate preexisting and newly generated PASS thresholds 1 year following THA using the institutional registry of an academic care center, and (3) assess whether THA PASS thresholds vary by patient age and sex. METHODS: The derivation cohort for the THA PASS threshold consisted of 774 patients (after exclusions) who were enrolled in an international, multicenter study from 2007 to 2012 and who completed the EQ-5D and a numerical rating scale (NRS) for satisfaction 1 year postoperatively. With the NRS dichotomized at 2.5 as the anchor, a PASS cutoff for the EQ-5D was generated using the 80% specificity method. The Youden method and 75th percentile approach served as sensitivity analyses. The external validation cohort comprised 1,472 patients who had undergone THA. PASS thresholds were used to dichotomize the external validation sample. The ability of the threshold to predict satisfaction was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Patient subcohorts were stratified by age (>65 and ≤65 years) and sex. RESULTS: Three THA PASS thresholds of 0.77 (our newly defined threshold), 0.82, and 0.92 were validated in this study. The EQ-5D PASS threshold of 0.77 (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.816) best predicted satisfaction 1 year after THA. Subcohort analyses yielded comparable 1-year PASS thresholds for THA between age cohorts and between sex cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies PASS thresholds that best predict patient satisfaction 1 year following THA. Although the varied methodology and patient cohorts used to derive PASS values complicate the comparison of these thresholds, this analysis can help surgeons understand the level of health-related quality of life associated with patient satisfaction following THA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Patient Acceptable Symptom State at 1 and 3 Years After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Thresholds for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

BACKGROUND: To facilitate the interpretation of numerical patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scales, concepts such as the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) have been introduced. Currently, no PASS thresholds have been established for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) after total knee arthroplasty. The aims of the current study were to define PASS thresholds for the KOOS subscales and several other generic and knee-specific PROMs at 1 and 3 years after total knee arthroplasty using data from an international, multicenter clinical outcome study of a modern, well-performing implant system. METHODS: The study cohort consisted of 499 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty from an international, multicenter study. At 1 and 3 years after a total knee arthroplasty, patients completed the KOOS, EuroQoL 5-dimension 3-level (EQ-5D-3L), EuroQol visual analog scale (EQ-VAS), and numerical rating scales (NRS) for knee-related pain and satisfaction. PASS thresholds were calculated at each follow-up interval using 3 anchor-based approaches, using patient-reported satisfaction as the anchor. RESULTS: According to our satisfaction anchor, 302 (78.9%) of 383 responding patients were satisfied at 1 year, and 242 (80.4%) of 301 responding patients were satisfied at 3 years. PASS thresholds were 84.5 points at 1 year and 87.5 points at 3 years for KOOS pain, 80.5 points at 1 year and 84.0 points at 3 years for KOOS symptoms, 83.0 points at 1 year and 87.5 points at 3 years for KOOS activities of daily living, 66.0 points at 1 year and 66.0 points at 3 years for KOOS quality of life, 83.0 points at 1 year and 90.5 points at 3 years for EQ-VAS, 0.80 point at 1 year and 0.80 point at 3 years for EQ-5D, and 1.8 points at 1 year and 1.8 points at 3 years for NRS pain. CONCLUSIONS: The current study is the first, to our knowledge, to propose PASS thresholds for the KOOS subscales at 1 and 3 years after total knee arthroplasty and contributes to PASS literature on other common PROMs. These findings will provide a useful reference for future total knee arthroplasty outcome studies and will help to determine what patients consider to be satisfactory operations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Limited use of surgeon's advice on exercise for knee osteoarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: The Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA:D) programme consists of patient education and supervised exercise therapy and adheres to clinical guidelines for knee osteoarthritis (OA). The purpose of this study was to present the treatment choice and clinical results of patients who were advised to participate in GLA:D before deciding on undergoing knee replacement. METHODS: Patient records from all patients with knee OA consulting one orthopaedic surgeon in 2015 were reviewed to identify those who were advised to seek GLA:D. Radiologic OA was classified with Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade 0-4: none-severe. Results after three months were extracted from the GLA:D database, including a visual analogue scale (VAS) for knee pain 0-100: best-poorest. RESULTS: Out of 142 patients with primary referrals due to knee OA, 83 (58.5%) were advised to participate in GLA:D. They had a mean age of 65.0 years (standard deviation (SD): ± 10.7), 59 (71.1%) were female, 34 (44.8%) had a KL grade 3-4 and were either not eligible for surgery or awaiting surgical decision. Only 18 (22%) participated in GLA:D, out of whom 14 (16.9%) had available three-month data. They improved (mean (SD)) from 61.4 (± 18.6) to 42.7 (± 25.1) (p < 0.001) with respect to VAS pain after three months. CONCLUSIONS: Few patients followed the surgeon's advice on GLA:D participation, indicating that treatment with GLA:D is underutilised. The pain reduction found in GLA:D participants confirms that patient education and supervised exercise therapy are beneficial prior to deciding on knee replacement, or if surgery is not indicated. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.

Proportion of Patients Reporting Acceptable Symptoms or Treatment Failure and Their Associated KOOS Values at 6 to 24 Months After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Study From the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry.

BACKGROUND: The proportion of patients perceiving their symptoms as either acceptable or as a failure of treatment after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is unknown. Commonly used outcome scores such as the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) suffer from poor interpretability, and little is known about which scores represent an acceptable or failed postoperative outcome. PURPOSE: To determine the proportion of patients reporting acceptable symptoms or treatment failure at 6 to 24 months after ACLR and to define KOOS values corresponding to the patients' perceptions of treatment outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: In 2012, a total of 1197 patients were randomly extracted from the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry at 3 postoperative time points: 397 at 6 months, 400 at 12 months, and 400 at 24 months. The inclusion criterion was unilateral primary ACLR. Questions about acceptable symptoms and treatment failure and the KOOS questionnaire were sent to the patients, and those who answered "yes" to the acceptable symptoms question were considered to have acceptable symptoms. Patients who answered "no" to the same question and "yes" to the treatment failure question were considered to have treatment failure. Mean KOOS values and 95% CIs were calculated for each category. RESULTS: A complete data set was obtained from 598 (50%) responders. Fifty-five percent of the patients perceived their symptoms as acceptable at 6-month follow-up versus 66% at 12- to 24-month follow-up. Similarly, 7% at 6-month follow-up perceived their treatment to have failed versus 12% at 12- to 24-month follow-up. Postoperative mean KOOS subscale values ranged from 72 (95% CI, 70-74) to 95 (95% CI, 94-96) for patients with acceptable symptoms and from 28 (95% CI, 22-34) to 71 (95% CI, 65-76) for patients with treatment failure. For both categories, the worst subscale values were seen in the sport and recreation and quality of life subscales and the best in the activities of daily living subscale. CONCLUSION: Only half of the patients at 6 months and about two-thirds at 1 to 2 years perceived their symptoms as acceptable after ACLR. For these patients, KOOS values reflected no problems to mild problems on average, while for patients reporting treatment failure, KOOS values reflected moderate to severe problems.