The Relationship Between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction With Ligament Reconstruction Tendon Interposition.

PURPOSE: Achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on an outcomes instrument and reporting satisfaction with surgical outcomes are not equivalent. We hypothesized that improvement exceeding the QuickDASH and PROMIS UE CAT MCID is associated with a greater likelihood of reporting satisfaction with ligament reconstruction tendon interposition (LRTI) treatment. Our secondary hypothesis was that a subset of patients failing to meet MCID would still be satisfied. METHODS: Patients ≥1 year after LRTI at one academic tertiary institution were included. QuickDASH and UE CAT v1.2 scores were obtained before and after surgery. Postoperative satisfaction and levels of improvement in pain and function were also obtained. RESULTS: A total of 93 patients completed the QuickDASH, and of those, 90 also completed the UE CAT. At a mean of 2.6 ± 1.0 years after surgery, QuickDASH and UE CAT score improvement exceeded the previously published MCID estimates of 8.8 and 4.8. Although 90% (84/93) of the patients reported satisfaction, only 85% (72/93) and 72% (59/90) achieved MCID on the QuickDASH and UE CAT, respectively. Using the MCID estimate of 8.8, 96% (72/75) of the patients meeting the MCID were satisfied with their treatment. Those failing to achieve MCID reported significantly less physical function and pain improvement; however, most were satisfied nonetheless (68% [13/19] for QuickDASH, 77% [23/30] for UE CAT). CONCLUSIONS: Achieving published MCID thresholds on the QuickDASH and PROMIS UE CAT v1.2 was predictive of patients reporting general satisfaction with their LRTI outcome ≥1 year after surgery. Most patients failing to achieve MCID still reported satisfaction with their LRTI. Achieving MCID thresholds alone should not be used as a surrogate for patient satisfaction with their treatment. Patient satisfaction is a complicated construct that is potentially very different from that of high-quality care. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.

Evaluation of Preoperative Factors Affecting Midterm Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Ligament Reconstruction Tendon Interposition: A Prognostic Study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of preoperative patient-reported outcomes as predictors of functional improvement following ligament reconstruction tendon interposition. We hypothesized that high levels of preoperative pain interference (PI) and upper-extremity disability are associated with lower magnitudes of functional improvement ≥1 year after surgery on the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) (primary outcome) and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (UE) Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) (UE CAT) v1.2 (secondary outcome). METHODS: Adult patients who underwent ligament reconstruction tendon interposition between February 2014 and April 2018 at an academic tertiary institution were considered for inclusion in this longitudinal cohort study. Patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline and ≥1 year after surgery. Univariate and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the magnitude of functional improvement on the QuickDASH and UE CAT. RESULTS: Among 93 included participants, the mean age was 61 ± 7 years, and 75 (81%) were women. At 2.5 ± 1.0 years after surgery, the QuickDASH and UE CAT improved by a mean of 24.5 ± 20.9 and 9.9 ± 10.7 points, respectively. In the primary multivariable model, a greater preoperative QuickDASH (indicative of lower function; coefficient, 0.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6 to 0.9) and lower preoperative Performance of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System PI CAT (eg, less pain interference; coefficient, -0.7; 95% CI, -1.2 to -0.2) were associated with greater QuickDASH improvement independent of potential confounders. In the secondary multivariable model, lower preoperative UE CAT (indicative of worse function; coefficient, -0.9; 95% CI, -1.1 to -0.7) and lower preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System PI CAT (coefficient, -0.3; 95% CI, -0.6 to -0.1) were associated with greater UE CAT improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative patient-reported outcomes may be useful in understanding the degree of improvement that certain patient populations can expect from ligament reconstruction tendon interposition. Those with lower baseline (preoperative) upper-extremity function and PI are expected to derive the greatest functional improvement in the midterm. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.

Preferences for Shared Decision Making in Older Adult Patients With Orthopedic Hand Conditions.

PURPOSE: The practice of medicine is shifting from a paternalistic doctor-patient relationship to a model in which the doctor and patient collaborate to decide optimal treatment. This study aims to determine whether the older orthopedic population desires a shared decision-making approach to care and to identify patient predictors for the preferred type of approach. METHODS: This cross-sectional investigation enrolled 99 patients, minimum age 65 years, at a tertiary hand specialty practice between March and June 2015. All patients completed the Control Preferences Scale, a validated system that distinguishes among patient preferences for patient-directed, collaborative, or physician-directed decision making. Bivariate and logistic regression analyses assessed associations among demographic data; clinic encounter variables such as familiarity with provider, trauma, diagnosis, and treatment decision; and the primary outcome of Control Preferences Scale preferences. RESULTS: A total of 81% of patients analyzed preferred a more patient-directed role in decision making; 46% of the total cohort cited a collaborative approach as their most preferred treatment approach. Sixty-seven percent cited the most physician-directed approach as their least preferred model of decision making. In addition, 49% reported that spending more time with their physician to address questions and explain the diagnosis would be most useful when making a health care decision and 73% preferred additional written informational material. Familiarity with the provider was associated with being more likely to prefer a collaborative approach. CONCLUSIONS: Older adult patients with symptomatic upper-extremity conditions desire more patient-directed roles in treatment decision making. Given the limited amount of reliable information obtained independently outside the office visit, our data suggest that written decision aids offer an approach to shared decision making that is most consistent with the preferences of the older orthopedic patient. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study quantifies older adults' desire to participate in decision making when choosing among treatments for hand conditions.