Assessing Common Content and Responsiveness of the QoR-15 and the SF-8 in the Context of Recovery from Regional Anesthesia for Joint Replacement.

PURPOSE: There is no consensus regarding how best to measure postoperative quality of recovery after anesthesia/surgery (e.g., using 24-hour survey instruments) in veterans or active military. Our goals were to (1) describe health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and recovery across time in veterans, (2) examine the commonality between the quality of recovery (QoR-15) and short-form (SF) surveys (including the SF-8, 24-hour version), and (3) examine the responsiveness of these surveys. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Boards from the University of Pittsburgh, the VA Pittsburgh, and the Human Research Protection Office of the Department of Defense. Secondary analyses of data were executed based on a randomized trial dataset of knee/hip arthroplasty patients, the study having recruited 135 total veterans. QoR-15 and HRQoL SF surveys were completed and self-reported before surgery (pre-op), on postoperative day 2 (PO-D2), and 6 weeks postoperatively. Descriptive statistics were used to examine scores across time. Common content was examined using Pearson's r. Responsiveness was examined using distribution-based methods. RESULTS: Average veteran age was 67 year, 89% were male, 88% white, and average body mass index was 33 kg∙m-2. QoR-15 scores declined from pre-op to PO-D2 but were higher than pre-op at 6 weeks. SF physical component summary (PCS) scores were low both pre-op and PO-D2, but were elevated over baseline at 6 weeks. SF mental component summary (MCS) scores declined from baseline to PO-D2 but were higher than pre-op at 6 weeks. Associations of the QoR-15 total score and PCS/MCS were medium/large and statistically significant at P ≤ .01. Both instruments were responsive to changes. CONCLUSION: QoR-15 and SF-8 have high content commonality and performed similarly in veterans across time. SF-8 has added benefits of (1) brevity, (2) assessment of physical and mental health components, and (3) being normed to the general population. The SF-8, if used without the QoR-15 in tandem in future study of anesthesia-related outcomes, would need to be supplemented by separate questions addressing postoperative nausea/vomiting (a frequent outcome after anesthesia that is relevant to same-day and next-day mobilization after elective joint replacement surgery).

Validity of the Modified Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale Supplemented With Items Germane to Total Joint Replacement: Secondary Analysis From a Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Valid measures of pain are helpful to adjust treatment plans in real time after total joint replacement (TJR). We enhanced the existing Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) with items related to pain at rest and movement, in specific reference to operative and nonoperative joints, creating the TJR-DVPRS. This manuscript is presented to validate the modified survey instrument. The aims of this psychometric study were to evaluate (1) the latent structure of the TJR-DVPRS, (2) the relationships among the pain dimensions represented on the TJR-DVPRS and the reference-standard Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (version 2, SF-MPQ-2), and (3) the responsiveness of these two measures before and after TJR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This report involves a secondary analysis of pain surveys from 135 veterans undergoing TJR at one center who participated in a randomized trial. The study was approved by the institutional review boards from participating institutions. The TJR-DVPRS and SF-MPQ-2 were completed preoperatively, during postoperative day 1, and 6 weeks post-surgery. Standard psychometric evaluations included correlations, principal component analysis, and internal consistency of survey items and subscales, using preoperative baseline data as a frame of reference. Responsiveness analysis included assessing both effect size and thresholds of clinically important change for survey subscales using data from all three time points. RESULTS: Two reliable subscales were identified for the TJR-DVPRS, one including items about pain intensity and interference related to the operative joint (Cronbach's α = .809) and the other including two pain items on the nonoperative joint. Combining the subscales indicated a two-factor solution: The first valid factor entailed the four subscales of the SF-MPQ-2 and the TJR-DVPRS operative joint subscales, indicating that these subscales validly represent the same pain dimension. The second valid factor entailed the TJR-DVPRS subscale addressing the nonoperative joint. Responsiveness analysis following accepted psychometric methods demonstrated significant decreases in pain from the preoperative period to 6 weeks postoperatively for all subscales. The TJR-DVPRS and SF-MPQ-2 subscales were similarly responsive, except for the SF-MPQ-2 neuropathic and TJR-DVPRS nonoperative joint subscales, which were minimally responsive during the preoperative to 6-week period. CONCLUSIONS: The TJR-DVPRS is valid for use among veterans undergoing TJR and poses significantly less respondent burden than does the SF-MPQ-2. The brevity and ease of use of the TJR-DVPRS make it a practical tool for use during surgical recovery to monitor pain intensity at rest and with movement in the operative joint, and to assess pain interference with activity, sleep, and mood. The TJR-DVPRS is at least as responsive as the SF-MPQ-2, but the SF-MPQ-2 neuropathic and TJR-DVPRS nonoperative joint subscales were minimally responsive. Limitations of this study include the small sample size, under-representation of women (which would be expected in the veteran population), and using only veterans. Future validations studies should include civilians and active military TJR patients.

Investigating the relationship between mild traumatic brain injury and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias: a systematic review.

The objective of this systematic review is to synthesize the relevant literature published after 2016 to ascertain the current landscape of science that relates mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) to the onset of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) and identify areas of need for future research. We conducted database searches and retrieved articles that were published after 2016 that utilized cognitive assessments to understand the relationship between mTBI and ADRD. We identified eight relevant articles in the review process, four of which presented a significant relationship between mTBI and disease or cognitive impairment outcomes. The studies included in this systematic review underscore the need for future research investigating a possible causal relationship between mTBI and ADRDs given the high prevalence of mTBI among brain injury patients and the lack of literature specifically addressing this issue. Future research should standardize the definitions of mTBI, AD, and ADRDs to create reliable and reproducible results that more comprehensively capture the nuances of this relationship.