Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: How to Maximize Their Utility and Mitigate Health Care Disparities.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a standardized assessment from the patient about their own health status. Although originally developed as research tools, PROMs can be used in clinical orthopaedic care to complement objective functional measures (eg, range of motion). When PROMs are used during clinical care, they can improve patient outcomes, engagement, well-being, and patient-physician communication. Therefore, PROMs are increasingly integrated into shared decision-making approaches to guide treatment decisions, enhance treatment plans, and predict outcomes. They are also being used in quality measurement and value-based health care arrangements. However, methods to communicate PROMs with patients have not been fully developed, and there continue to be barriers to implementing their collection and communication at scale. In addition, measuring care quality and communicating PROMs with patients may have unintended consequences, such as when used in measurement without accounting for confounding factors (eg, psychological and social health), or in perpetuating health care disparities when used imprecisely (eg, lack of linguistic or cultural validation). It is important to describe the current state of PROM use in orthopaedic surgery, highlight opportunities and challenges of PROM use in clinical care, and provide a roadmap for how to incorporate PROMs to equitably improve patient health and build orthopaedic surgery practices.

Evaluating medical students' knowledge of patient-reported outcomes and the impact of curriculum intervention in consecutive cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collection and utilization improves patient-provider communication, symptom reporting, and patient satisfaction. Despite their significance, the science and utility of PROs are not part of required curriculum in medical education. The authors describe the results of a survey distributed to medical students evaluating their experience, knowledge, and perceptions of PROs, report on outcomes of the impact of formal PRO education on medical student knowledge, and describe strategies to foster the spread of PRO education into other programs. METHODS: The authors developed and distributed a 20-question web-based survey distributed to medical students at two U.S. medical schools to evaluate students' experience, knowledge, and perceptions of PROs. To compare medical students' knowledge in their pre-clinical years (M1-M2) to those in their clinical years (M3-M4), the authors calculated odds ratios and determined significance determined using chi-squared tests. To determine the utility of formal education on medical students' knowledge of PROs, the authors invited 4th year medical students at a single institution to participate in a survey before and two weeks after receiving formal PRO education as part of the medical school curriculum, spanning three years. RESULTS: 137 (15%) medical students responded to the initial survey. Respondents' knowledge of PROs was low and did not differ when comparing pre-clinical to clinical years in school. Less than 10% had received education on PROs and only 16% felt prepared to use PROs in patient care. Respondents demonstrated positive attitudes towards PROs, with 84% expressing interest in learning about PROs. In the second phase education cohort of 231 (77% response rate) 4th -year medical students over three years, formal education improved correct response rates to PRO questions. After education, 90% (121/134) agreed PROs are an important component of high-quality care. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies a gap in knowledge about PROs among medical students irrespective of year in training. It also shows that structured education may help fill the PRO knowledge gap, potentially providing future clinicians with the skills to implement PROs into clinical practice, aligning with the broader shift towards patient-centric evidence-based healthcare practices.

Impact of Sports Participation on Achievement of Clinically Relevant Outcomes 2 Years After ACL Reconstruction.

Background: Clinically relevant threshold values associated with patient-reported outcome measures after orthopaedic procedures such as anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are important for relating these scores to meaningful postoperative improvement. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS-CAT) after ACLR. It was hypothesized that preoperative sport participation would have an impact on PASS achievement. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Included were consecutive patients who underwent primary assisted ACLR between January 4 and August 1, 2016. Patients were administered the PROMIS-CAT Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference domains preoperatively and at a minimum 2 years postoperatively, with external anchor questions used to determine the PASS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for the entire study population as well as separately for athletes and nonathletes to determine PROMIS PASS thresholds for each population. A previously published PROMIS-PF minimal clinically important difference was used to evaluate postoperative improvement. A post hoc multivariate nominal logistic multivariate analysis was constructed to assess the effects of preoperative patient characteristics on the likelihood of attaining both the minimal clinically important difference and PASS. Results: In total, 112 patients were included in the study, with 79 (71%) having recreational or higher levels of athletic participation. The PASS for the study population was 56.0 (area under the ROC curve, 0.86) and was unaffected by baseline PROMIS-PF scores but was affected by preoperative athletic participation (56.0 for athletes, 49.0 for nonathletes). A post hoc analysis found 57 patients (51%) achieved the PASS for the PROMIS-PF (cutoff, 56.0), but when the athlete and nonathlete thresholds were applied to their respective patient groups, 66% of athletes and 64% of nonathletes achieved the PASS postoperatively. The multivariate analysis found that sport participation (odds ratio, 6.2; P = .001) but not age, sex, body mass index, or preoperative PROMIS affected the likelihood of achieving the PASS on the PROMIS-PF. Conclusion: Preoperative athletic participation significantly affected the ability to achieve PASS.

Republication of "Current Concepts Review: Hallux Rigidus".

Arthritis of the first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint, hallux rigid, is a common and disabling source of foot pain in the adult population. Hallux rigidus is characterized by diseased cartilage and large, periarticular osteophytes that result in a stiff, painful joint. Activity modification, sensible shoes, orthotics, anti-inflammatory medications and occasional intra-articular steroid injections can be attempted to alleviate the discomfort associated with hallux rigidus. A number of surgical options exist for the treatment of recalcitrant hallux rigidus. Cheilectomy is a useful treatment for dorsal impingement pain seen in mild hallux rigidus. A new polyvinyl alcohol hemi-arthroplasty implant has shown promising early and midterm results in the treatment of advanced hallux rigidus; however, arthrodesis of the first MTP joint remains the gold standard treatment for advanced hallux rigidus because of unpredictable outcomes after early-generation joint replacement implants.

Operationalizing PROMs at the Musculoskeletal Practice and Policy Levels.

There continues to be growing interest in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), especially as value-based healthcare initiatives gain more traction. Although it is well-established that PROMs can be useful in clinical research, how to operationalize PROMs in clinical care and policy initiatives remains a "work in progress." Following the design of a comprehensive PROM administration and routine collection system, orthopaedic surgeons and their patients can reap the benefits of PROMs in practice through improved shared clinical decision-making discussions at the individual patient level and closer symptom monitoring on a large scale, with improved resource allocation at the population health level. Although certain government and payer incentives exist to collect PROMs at present, it is reasonable to assume that future policy initiatives will begin to use the actual PROM scores to assess clinical outcomes. Orthopaedic surgeons with interest in this area should prioritize their involvement in policy discussion to ensure PROMs are being used appropriately in novel payment models and policy endeavors so that they are both evaluated and compensated fairly. Specifically, orthopaedic surgeons can help ensure appropriate risk adjustment of patients when this is being done. Undoubtedly, PROMs will only become a larger part of musculoskeletal care moving forward.

AOA Critical Issues: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Why Every Orthopaedic Practice Should Be Collecting Them.

ABSTRACT: Patient-centered care is essential to providing high-quality value-based care. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are arguably the best tools available to orthopaedic providers for providing patient-centered care. Many clinical opportunities exist for the implementation of PROMs into routine practice, such as shared decision-making, mental health screening, and prediction of postoperative disposition. Routine use of PROMs is also an adjunct to the streamlining of documentation, patient intake, and telemedicine visits, and hospitals can aggregate PROMs for the purpose of risk stratification. Physicians can harness the power of PROMs for quality improvement initiatives and improvement of the patient experience. Despite these numerous applications, PROMs are frequently underutilized tools. Understanding the many benefits of PROMs may allow orthopaedic practices to justify investing in these valuable tools.

Does Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Use at New Foot and Ankle Patient Clinic Visits Improve Patient Activation, Experience, and Satisfaction?

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can help predict clinical outcomes and improve shared clinical decision-making discussions. There remains a paucity of research assessing how the use of PROMs may drive improved patient experience and patient activation. METHODS: New foot and ankle patients completed PROMIS physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), and depression assessments. Patients were then randomized to viewing and discussing their PROMIS scores with their surgeon or not. Following the clinic visit, patients completed a series of Clinician & Group Survey-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) questions and the Patient Activation Measure (PAM). Responses to the CG-CAHPS questions and PAM were compared between the 2 groups and after clustering on surgeon. Potential interaction effects by social deprivation were also explored. RESULTS: After enrolling patients but removing those lost to follow-up or with missing data, 97 and 116 patients remained in the intervention control cohorts, respectively. No difference was found in CG-CAHPS responses nor PAM scores between the 2 groups (P > .05). All surgeons were highly rated by all patients. When clustered by surgeon, intervention subjects were less likely to indicate "top box" scores for the understanding domain of the CG-CAHPS question (OR 0.51, P < .001) and had decreased odds of high patient activation compared to control subjects (OR 0.67; P = .005). Among the most socially disadvantaged patients, there was no difference in control and intervention subjects in their likelihood of having high patient activation (P = .09). CONCLUSION: Highly rated foot and ankle surgeons who show and discuss PROM results may not improve patient experience or activation and may, in fact, decrease understanding or patient activation in select populations. Future work is needed to determine when PROM discussions are most beneficial and how best to present PROMs data, as we suspect that how the information was presented-and not the use of PROMs-resulted in our findings. Health literacy tools and/or communication training may better engage different patient groups regarding PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Clinical Improvement Following Operative Management of Ankle Fractures Among Patients With and Without Moderate to High Depressive Symptoms: An Analysis Using PROMIS.

Background: Understanding the recovery trajectory following operative management of ankle fractures can help surgeons guide patient expectations. Further, it is beneficial to consider the impact of mental health on the recovery trajectory. Our study aimed to address the paucity of literature focused on understanding the recovery trajectory following surgery for ankle fractures, including in patients with depressive symptoms. Methods: From February 2015 to March 2020, patients with isolated ankle fractures were asked to complete Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression questionnaires as part of routine care at presentation and follow-up time points. Linear mixed effects regression models were used to evaluate the patient recovery pattern, comparing the preoperative time point to <3 months, 3-6 months, and >6 months across all patients. Additional models that included the presence of depression symptoms as a covariate were then used. Results: A total of 153 patients met inclusion criteria. By 3-6 months, PROMIS PF (ß: 9.95, 95% CI: 7.97-11.94, P < .001), PI (ß: -10.30, 95% CI: -11.87 to -8.72, P < .001), and Depression (ß: -5.60, 95% CI: -7.01 to -4.20, P < .001) improved relative to the preoperative time point. This level of recovery was sustained thereafter. When incorporating depressive symptoms into our model as a covariate, the moderate to high depressive symptoms were associated with significantly and clinically important worse PROMIS PF (ß: -4.00, 95% CI: -7.00 to -1.00, P = .01) and PI (ß: 3.16, 95% CI: -0.55 to 5.76, P = .02) scores. Conclusion: Following ankle fracture surgery, all patients tend to clinically improve by 3-6 months postoperatively and then continue to appreciate this clinical improvement. Although patients with moderate to high depressive symptoms also clinically improve following the same trajectory, they tend to do so to a lesser level than those who have low depressive symptoms. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Physical Function and Pain Interference Levels of Hallux Rigidus Patients Before and After Synthetic Cartilage Implant vs Arthrodesis Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hallux rigidus is a common and painful degenerative condition of the great toe limiting a patient's physical function and quality of life. The purpose of this study was to investigate pre- and postoperative physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI) levels of patients undergoing synthetic cartilage implant hemiarthroplasty (SCI) vs arthrodesis (AD) for treatment of hallux rigidus using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). METHODS: PROMIS PF and PI t scores were analyzed for patients who underwent either SCI or AD. Postoperative final PROMIS t scores were obtained via phone survey. Linear mixed model analysis was used to assess differences in PF and PI at each follow-up point. Final follow-up scores were analyzed using independent sample t tests. RESULTS: Total 181 (59 SCI, 122 AD) operatively managed patients were included for analysis of PROMIS scores. Final phone survey was performed at a minimum of 14 (mean 33, range, 14-59) months postoperatively, with 101 patients (40 SCI, 61 AD) successfully contacted. The mean final follow-up was significantly different for SCI and AD: 27 vs 38 months, respectively (P < .01). The mean age of the SCI cohort was lower than the AD cohort (57.5 vs 61.5 years old, P = .01). Average PF t scores were higher in the SCI cohort at baseline (47.1 and 43.9, respectively, P = .01) and at final follow-up (51.4 vs 45.9, respectively, P < .01). A main effect of superior improvement in PF was noted in the SCI group (+4.3) vs the AD group (+2) across time intervals (P < .01). PI t scores were similar between the 2 procedures across time points. CONCLUSION: The SCI cohort reported slightly superior PF t scores preoperatively and at most follow-up time points compared with the arthrodesis group. No differences were found for PI or complication rates between the 2 treatment groups during this study time frame. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

URMC Universal Depression Screening Initiative: Patient Reported Outcome Assessments to Promote a Person-Centered Biopsychosocial Population Health Management Strategy.

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can promote person-centered biopsychosocial health care by measuring outcomes that matter to patients, including functioning and well-being. Data support feasibility and acceptability of PRO administration as part of routine clinical care, but less is known about its effects on population health, including detection of unmet healthcare needs. Our objectives were to examine differences in rates of clinically significant depression across sociodemographic groups and clinical settings from universal depression screens in a large health system, estimate the number of patients with untreated depression detected by screenings, and examine associations between biopsychosocial PROs-physical, psychological, and social health. Methods: We analyzed data from over 200,000 adult patients who completed depression screens-either PROMIS (Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) or PHQ-2/9-as part of routine outpatient care. Results: Depression screens were positive in 14.2% of the sample, with more positive screens among younger vs. older adults, women vs. men, non-White vs. White, and Hispanics vs. non-Hispanics. These same sociodemographic indicators, as well as completing screening in primary care (vs. specialty care) were also associated with greater likelihood of detected depression in the medical record. Discussion: Universal screening for depression symptoms throughout a large health system appears acceptable and has the potential to detect depression in diverse patient populations outside of behavioral health. Expanded delivery of PROs to include physical and social health as well as depression should be explored to develop a clinically-relevant model for addressing patients' biopsychosocial needs in an integrated fashion across the health system.

Prediction of post-interventional physical function in diabetic foot ulcer patients using patient reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS).

BACKGROUND: Infected diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) patients present with an impaired baseline physical function (PF) that can be further compromised by surgical intervention to treat the infection. The impact of surgical interventions on Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PF within the DFU population has not been investigated. We hypothesize that preoperative PROMIS scores (PF, Pain Interference (PI), Depression) in combination with relevant clinical factors can be utilized to predict postoperative PF in DFU patients. METHODS: DFU patients from a single academic physician's practice between February 2015 and November 2018 were identified (n = 240). Ninety-two patients met inclusion criteria with complete follow-up and PROMIS computer adaptive testing records. Demographic and clinical factors, procedure performed, and wound healing status were collected. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, Chi-Squared tests and multidimensional modelling were applied to all variables' pre- and postoperative values to assess patients' postoperative PF. RESULTS: The mean age was 60.5 (33-96) years and mean follow-up was 4.7 (3-12) months. Over 70 % of the patients' initial PF were 2-3 standard deviations below the US population (n = 49; 28). Preoperative PF (p < 0.01), PI (p < 0.01), Depression (p < 0.01), CRF (p < 0.02) and amputation level (p < 0.04) showed significant univariate correlation with postoperative PF. Multivariate model (r = 0.55) showed that the initial PF (p = 0.004), amputation level (p = 0.008), and wound healing status (p = 0.001) predicted postoperative PF. CONCLUSIONS: Majority of DFU patients present with poor baseline PF. Preoperative PROMIS scores (PF, PI, Depression) are predictive of postoperative PROMIS PF in DFU patients. Postoperative patient's physical function can be assessed by PFpostoperative = 29.42 + 0.34 (PFinitial) - 5.87 (Not Healed) - 2.63 (Amputation Category). This algorithm can serve as a valuable tool for predicting post-operative physical function and setting expectations.

The Impact of Patient Age on Foot and Ankle Arthrodesis Supplemented with Autograft or an Autograft Alternative (rhPDGF-BB/ß-TCP).

A recent survey of orthopaedic surgeons asking about risk factors for nonunion following foot and ankle arthrodesis revealed that patient age is considered to be a relatively low risk factor, despite the potential for autologous graft quality to deteriorate with increasing age. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the impact of patient age and graft type on fusion rates following hindfoot and ankle arthrodesis. METHODS: In this study, we analyzed data from a previously published clinical trial, comparing fusion success in 397 subjects who underwent hindfoot or ankle arthrodesis (597 joints) supplemented with either autograft or an osteoinductive autograft alternative, recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor-BB homodimer carried in beta-tricalcium phosphate (rhPDGF-BB/ß-TCP). The odds of fusion success were compared among subjects older or younger than age thresholds of 55, 60, 65, 70, and 75 years. The odds of fusion success were also compared between autograft and rhPDGF-BB/ß-TCP among subjects older than each age threshold. RESULTS: In the autograft group, the joints of subjects who were younger than the age thresholds of 60 and 65 years had >2 times the odds of successful fusion compared with those of older subjects. There was no significant difference in the odds of fusion success between the older and younger subjects at the age threshold of 55 years. In the rhPDGF-BB/ß-TCP group, there was no significant difference in the odds of successful fusion between older and younger subjects at any age threshold. When the odds of fusion success were compared between the 2 graft materials in subjects who were older than each age threshold, rhPDGF-BB/ß-TCP had approximately 2 times the odds of fusion success compared with autograft for all thresholds, except 55 years. CONCLUSIONS: The presented evidence suggests that age is an identifiable and concerning risk factor for hindfoot and ankle arthrodesis nonunion, a finding in contrast to the wider perception in the surgeon community. Notably, patients ≥60 years of age had significantly lower odds of fusion success with the use of autograft. The data reveal that use of rhPDGF-BB/ß-TCP as an alternative bone-healing adjunct may help mitigate the risk of nonunion when these procedures are performed in the elderly population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Threshold Values for Success After Hip Arthroscopy Using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Assessment: Determining the Minimum Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State.

BACKGROUND: Threshold values for patient-reported outcome measures, such as the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS), are important for relating postoperative outcomes to meaningful functional improvement. PURPOSE: To determine the PASS and MCID after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaire. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement were administered preoperative and minimum 1-year postoperative PROMIS surveys focusing on physical function (PF) and pain interference (PI). External anchor questions for the MCID and PASS were given with the postoperative PROMIS survey. Receiver operator curves were constructed to determine the threshold values for the MCID and PASS. Curves were generated for the study population as well as separate cohorts segregated by median baseline PF or PI scores and preoperative athletic participation. A multivariate post hoc analysis was then constructed to evaluate factors associated with achieving the PASS or MCID. RESULTS: There were 113 patients (35% male; mean ± SD age, 32.8 ± 12.5 years; body mass index, 25.8 ± 4.8 kg/m2), with 60 (53%) reporting preoperative athletic participation. Survey time averaged 77.5 ± 49.2 seconds. Anchor-based MCID values were 5.1 and 10.9 for the PF and PI domains, respectively. PASS thresholds were 51.8 and 51.9 for the PF and PI, respectively. PASS values were not affected by baseline scores, but athletic patients had a higher PASS threshold than did those not participating in a sport (53.1 vs 44.7). MCID values were affected by preoperative baseline scores but were largely independent of sports participation. A post hoc analysis found that 94 (83%) patients attained the MCID PF while 66 (58%) attained the PASS PF. A multivariate nominal logistic regression found that younger patients (P = .01) and athletic patients (P = .003) were more likely to attain the PASS. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS survey is an efficient metric to evaluate preoperative disability and postoperative function after primary hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement. The MCID and PASS provide surgeons with threshold values to help determine PROMIS scores that are clinically meaningful to patients, and they can assist with therapeutic decision making as well as expectation setting.

Chopart Amputation: Questioning the Clinical Efficacy of a Long-standing Surgical Option for Diabetic Foot Infection.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot ulcers with associated infection and osteomyelitis often lead to partial or complete limb loss. Determination of the appropriate level for amputation based on the patient's baseline physical function, extent of infection, vascular patency, and comorbidities can be challenging. Although Chopart amputation preserves greater limb length than more proximal alternatives such as Syme or below-the-knee amputations (BKA), challenges with wound healing and prosthesis fitting have been reported. We aimed to investigate the functional and clinical outcomes of Chopart amputation combined with tendon transfers. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent Chopart amputations for diabetic foot infections by an academic orthopaedic group between August 2013 and September 2018. Subjects completed three Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systems (PROMIS) instruments. Incidence of postoperative complications and change in patient-reported outcomes before and after surgery were recorded. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with an average age of 60.8 (range, 44 to 79) years were identified. The mean follow-up was 22.8 months (range, 6.7 to 51.0). Seventeen of the 18 total patients developed postoperative wound complications. These lead to revision amputations in 10 Chopart amputees, consisting of two Syme and eight BKAs. Half of the Chopart patients never received a prosthesis because of delayed wound healing and revision amputation. PROMIS physical function (PF) (31.1 pre-op and 28.6 post-op), pain interference (63.1 pre-op and 59.4 post-op), and depression (53.0 pre-op and 54.8 post-op) did not show significant change (P-values = 0.38, 0.29, 0.72, respectively). Pre- and post-op the PROMIS physical function scores were well below the US average. DISCUSSION: In our patient cohort, 94% of patients developed postoperative wound complication. Only 44% of patients ever successfully ambulated with a prosthesis after Chopart amputation, and the others (56%) required revision amputations such as a BKA. Even after wound healing, Chopart amputees may struggle with obtaining a prosthesis suitable for ambulation. Surgeons should exercise judicious patient selection before performing Chopart amputation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, Case Series.