The Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit in the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Patients Undergoing Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation in the Knee.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known regarding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) with regard to the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Lysholm score, and Short Form 12 (SF-12) score of patients who undergo osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA). We aimed to determine the MCID and SCB associated with those patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after OCA. DESIGN: We analyzed the data of 86 consecutive patients who underwent OCA and who completed satisfaction surveys at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively and had at least one repeated PROM. MCID was determined using an anchor-based method: the optimal cutoff point for receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curves. If an anchor-based method was inapplicable, distribution-based methods were employed. SCB was determined using ROC curve analysis. RESULTS: Based on the ROC curve analysis, MCID was 16.7 for KOOS pain, 25 for KOOS sports/recreation, and 9.8 for IKDC. SCB was 27.7 for KOOS pain, 10.7 for KOOS symptom, 30 for KOOS sports/recreation, 31.3 for KOOS quality of life, 26.9 for IKDC, 25 for Lysholm, and 12.1 for SF-12 physical component summary. No significant association was noted between SCB achievement and the baseline patient factors and baseline PROMs. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the MCIDs and SCBs of several PROMs in patients undergoing OCA. These results will aid the interpretation of the effect of treatment and clinical trial settings. Moreover, the SCBs will help surgeons in the counseling of patients, where patients expect optimal results rather than minimal improvement.

IKDC or KOOS? Which measures symptoms and disabilities most important to postoperative articular cartilage repair patients?

BACKGROUND: The relevance of knee-specific subjective measures of outcome to patients has not been evaluated for cartilage repair procedures. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify which instrument out of the Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form measures symptoms and disabilities most important to postoperative articular cartilage repair patients. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data were collected from 58 participants of an Internet knee forum via a self-reported online questionnaire consisting of demographic and surgical data, the Tegner activity scale, and 49 consolidated items from the Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form. Item importance, frequency, and frequency-importance product were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form was the highest scoring instrument in all categories. However, 2 of the Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales ("function in sport and recreation" and "knee-related quality of life") scored higher on mean importance and frequency-importance product than the overall International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form score. CONCLUSION: The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form provided the best overall measure of symptoms and disabilities that are most important to this population of postoperative articular cartilage repair patients. This brings into question the validity of using the Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in shorter-term--less than 10 years--studies. Issues related to sports activity appear to be highly valued and very pertinent to evaluation of outcomes for this patient group.