Clinical Decision Support System Used in Spinal Disorders: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Spinal disorders are highly prevalent worldwide with high socioeconomic costs. This cost is associated with the demand for treatment and productivity loss, prompting the exploration of technologies to improve patient outcomes. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) are computerized systems that are increasingly used to facilitate safe and efficient health care. Their applications range in depth and can be found across health care specialties. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to explore the use of CDSSs in patients with spinal disorders. METHODS: We used the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidance for this scoping review and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) statement. Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, and PsycINFO, were searched from inception until October 11, 2022. The included studies examined the use of digitalized CDSSs in patients with spinal disorders. RESULTS: A total of 4 major CDSS functions were identified from 31 studies: preventing unnecessary imaging (n=8, 26%), aiding diagnosis (n=6, 19%), aiding prognosis (n=11, 35%), and recommending treatment options (n=6, 20%). Most studies used the knowledge-based system. Logistic regression was the most commonly used method, followed by decision tree algorithms. The use of CDSSs to aid in the management of spinal disorders was generally accepted over the threat to physicians' clinical decision-making autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: Although the effectiveness was frequently evaluated by examining the agreement between the decisions made by the CDSSs and the health care providers, comparing the CDSS recommendations with actual clinical outcomes would be preferable. In addition, future studies on CDSS development should focus on system integration, considering end user's needs and preferences, and external validation and impact studies to assess effectiveness and generalizability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF Registries osf.io/dyz3f; https://osf.io/dyz3f.

Machine Learning Models for Predicting Disability and Pain Following Lumbar Disc Herniation Surgery.

Importance: Lumber disc herniation surgery can reduce pain and disability. However, a sizable minority of individuals experience minimal benefit, necessitating the development of accurate prediction models. Objective: To develop and validate prediction models for disability and pain 12 months after lumbar disc herniation surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, multicenter, registry-based prognostic study was conducted on a cohort of individuals undergoing lumbar disc herniation surgery from January 1, 2007, to May 31, 2021. Patients in the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery from all public and private hospitals in Norway performing spine surgery were included. Data analysis was performed from January to June 2023. Exposures: Microdiscectomy or open discectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Treatment success at 12 months, defined as improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) of 22 points or more; Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) back pain improvement of 2 or more points, and NRS leg pain improvement of 4 or more points. Machine learning models were trained for model development and internal-external cross-validation applied over geographic regions to validate the models. Model performance was assessed through discrimination (C statistic) and calibration (slope and intercept). Results: Analysis included 22 707 surgical cases (21 161 patients) (ODI model) (mean [SD] age, 47.0 [14.0] years; 12 952 [57.0%] males). Treatment nonsuccess was experienced by 33% (ODI), 27% (NRS back pain), and 31% (NRS leg pain) of the patients. In internal-external cross-validation, the selected machine learning models showed consistent discrimination and calibration across all 5 regions. The C statistic ranged from 0.81 to 0.84 (pooled random-effects meta-analysis estimate, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.81-0.84) for the ODI model. Calibration slopes (point estimates, 0.94-1.03; pooled estimate, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.93-1.06) and calibration intercepts (point estimates, -0.05 to 0.11; pooled estimate, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.10) were also consistent across regions. For NRS back pain, the C statistic ranged from 0.75 to 0.80 (pooled estimate, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.79); for NRS leg pain, the C statistic ranged from 0.74 to 0.77 (pooled estimate, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.74-0.76). Only minor heterogeneity was found in calibration slopes and intercepts. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that the models developed can inform patients and clinicians about individual prognosis and aid in surgical decision-making.

Body Mass Index, Quality of Life and Activity Limitation Trajectories over 2 Years in Patients with Knee or Hip Osteoarthritis: A Dual Trajectory Approach Based on 4265 Patients Included in the AktivA Quality Register.

(1) Background: Recent studies claim that weight-neutral approaches emphasizing physical activity might be as effective as weight-loss-centered approaches for improving pain and physical function in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis. The objectives were to identify distinctive groups of individuals with similar BMI, quality of life and activity limitation trajectories over two years, to compare the overall differences between BMI trajectory groups for baseline variables and to explore the probabilities of the quality of life and activity limitation trajectory groups conditional on the BMI group. (2) Methods: Baseline data for age, gender, BMI, quality of life, activity limitations, pain, general health, knee or hip osteoarthritis and follow-up data on BMI, quality of life and activity limitations at 3, 12 and 24 months were retrieved from the "Active with osteoarthritis" (AktivA) electronic quality register. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to identify distinct trajectories for BMI, quality of life and activity limitations. (3) Results: 4265 patients were included in the study. Four distinct BMI trajectories were identified, normal weight (31%), slightly overweight (43%), overweight (20%) and obese (6%). At baseline, there were highly significant differences between all BMI groups, pain increased and age and general health decreased with higher BMI. Irrespective of weight category, minimal changes in BMI were found over the two-year follow-up period. Over 80% of the participants showed moderate-to-considerable improvements both in quality of life and activity limitations. (4) Conclusions: Almost 70% of the participants belonged to the overweight trajectories. Despite no significant weight reduction over the two years, eight in every 10 participants improved their quality of life and reduced their activity limitations after participating in the AktivA program.

OPTIKNEE 2022: consensus recommendations to optimise knee health after traumatic knee injury to prevent osteoarthritis.

The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA.

Measurement properties for muscle strength tests following anterior cruciate ligament and/or meniscus injury: What tests to use and where do we need to go? A systematic review with meta-analyses for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVES: Critically appraise and summarise the measurement properties of knee muscle strength tests after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscus injury using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments Risk of Bias checklist. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analyses. The modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-guided assessment of evidence quality. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTSDiscus searched from inception to 5 May 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies evaluating knee extensor or flexor strength test reliability, measurement error, validity, responsiveness or interpretability in individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injuries with a mean injury age of ≤30 years. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were included involving 31 different muscle strength tests (mode and equipment) in individuals following an ACL injury and/or an isolated meniscus injury. Strength tests were assessed for reliability (n=8), measurement error (n=7), construct validity (n=27) and criterion validity (n=7). Isokinetic concentric extensor and flexor strength tests were the best rated with sufficient intrarater reliability (very low evidence quality) and construct validity (moderate evidence quality). Isotonic extensor and flexor strength tests showed sufficient criterion validity, while isometric extensor strength tests had insufficient construct and criterion validity (high evidence quality). CONCLUSION: Knee extensor and flexor strength tests of individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injury lack evidence supporting their measurement properties. There is an urgent need for high-quality studies on these measurement properties. Until then, isokinetic concentric strength tests are most recommended, with isotonic strength tests a good alternative.

Four Distinct 5-Year Trajectories of Knee Function Emerge in Patients Who Followed the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Treatment Algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Impairments and dysfunction vary considerably after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, and distinct subgroups may exist. PURPOSE: (1) To identify subgroups of patients with ACL injury who share common trajectories of patient-reported knee function from initial presentation to 5 years after a treatment algorithm where they chose either ACL reconstruction (ACLR) plus rehabilitation or rehabilitation alone. (2) To assess associations with trajectory affiliation. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We included 276 patients with a acute first-time complete unilateral ACL injury. All patients underwent a 5-week neuromuscular and strength training program before a shared decision-making process about treatment. Within their latest attended follow-up, 62% of patients had undergone early ACLR (<6 months after the 5-week program), 11% delayed ACLR (>6 months after the 5-week program), and 27% progressive rehabilitation alone. Patients completed the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) at inclusion, after the 5-week program, and at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years after ACLR or completion of the 5-week program (patients treated with rehabilitation alone). We used group-based trajectory modeling to identify trajectories of IKDC-SKF and multinomial logistic regression to assess associations with trajectory affiliation. RESULTS: Four distinct trajectories of IKDC-SKF were identified: Low (n = 22; 8.0% of the cohort), Moderate (n = 142; 51.4%), High (n = 105; 38.0%), and High Before Declining (n = 7; 2.5%). The High trajectory had higher scores at inclusion than the Moderate trajectory, but both improved considerably within 1 year and had thereafter stable high scores. The High Before Declining trajectory also started relatively high and improved considerably within 1 year but experienced a large deterioration between 2 and 5 years. The Low trajectory started low and had minimal improvement. New knee injuries were important characteristics of the High Before Declining trajectory, concomitant meniscal injuries were significantly associated with following the Low (vs Moderate) trajectory, and early/preoperative quadriceps strength and hop symmetry (measured at inclusion) were significantly associated with following the High (vs Moderate) trajectory. CONCLUSION: We identified 4 distinct 5-year trajectories of patient-reported knee function, indicating 4 subgroups of patients with ACL injury. Importantly, 88% of the patients who followed our treatment algorithm followed the Moderate and High trajectories characterized by good improvement and high scores. Due to eligibility criteria and procedures in our cohort, we can only generalize our model to athletes without major concomitant injuries who follow a similar treatment algorithm. Concomitant meniscal injuries and new knee injuries were important factors in the unfavorable Low and High Before Declining trajectories. These associations were exploratory but support the trajectories' validity. Our findings can contribute to patient education about prognosis and underpin the importance of continued secondary injury prevention.

What tests should be used to assess functional performance in youth and young adults following anterior cruciate ligament or meniscal injury? A systematic review of measurement properties for the OPTIKNEE consensus.

OBJECTIVES: To critically appraise and summarise measurement properties of functional performance tests in individuals following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) or meniscal injury. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches were performed in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and SPORTSDiscus (EBSCO) on 7 July 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies evaluating at least one measurement property of a functional performance test including individuals following an ACL tear or meniscal injury with a mean injury age of ≤30 years. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments Risk of Bias checklist was used to assess methodological quality. A modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessed evidence quality. RESULTS: Thirty studies evaluating 26 functional performance tests following ACL injury were included. No studies were found in individuals with an isolated meniscal injury. Included studies evaluated reliability (n=5), measurement error (n=3), construct validity (n=26), structural validity (n=1) and responsiveness (n=1). The Single Leg Hop and Crossover Hop tests showed sufficient intrarater reliability (high and moderate quality evidence, respectively), construct validity (low-quality and moderate-quality evidence, respectively) and responsiveness (low-quality evidence). CONCLUSION: Frequently used functional performance tests for individuals with ACL or meniscal injury lack evidence supporting their measurement properties. The Single Leg Hop and Crossover Hop are currently the most promising tests following ACL injury. High-quality studies are required to facilitate stronger recommendations of performance-based outcomes following ACL or meniscal injury.

Knee extensor muscle weakness is a risk factor for the development of knee osteoarthritis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including 46 819 men and women.

OBJECTIVE: To update a systematic review on the association between knee extensor muscle weakness and the risk of incident knee osteoarthritis in women and men. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Systematic searches in PubMed, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, AMED and CENTRAL in May 2021. ELIGIBLE CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Longitudinal studies with at least 2 years follow-up including baseline measure of knee extensor muscle strength, and follow-up measure of symptomatic or radiographic knee osteoarthritis. Studies including participants with known knee osteoarthritis at baseline were excluded. Risk of bias assessment was conducted using six criteria for study validity and bias. Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation assessed overall quality of evidence. Meta-analysis estimated the OR for the association between knee extensor muscle weakness and incident knee osteoarthritis. RESULTS: We included 11 studies with 46 819 participants. Low quality evidence indicated that knee extensor muscle weakness increased the odds of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in women (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.64) and in adult men (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.78), and for radiographic knee osteoarthritis in women: OR 1.43 (95% CI 1.19 to 1.71) and in men: OR 1.39 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.82). No associations were identified for knee injured populations except for radiographic osteoarthritis in men. DISCUSSION: There is low quality evidence that knee extensor muscle weakness is associated with incident symptomatic and radiographic knee osteoarthritis in women and men. Optimising knee extensor muscle strength may help to prevent knee osteoarthritis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020214976.

Muscle Strength and Osteoarthritis Progression After Surgery or Exercise for Degenerative Meniscal Tears: Secondary Analyses of a Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate muscle strength changes following partial meniscectomy or exercise therapy for degenerative meniscal tears and the relationship between baseline muscle strength and osteoarthritis progression. METHODS: Secondary analysis of a randomized trial (n = 140 participants). Isokinetic quadriceps and hamstrings strength (peak torque [Nm/kg] and total work [J/kg]) were assessed at baseline, 3-month, 12-month, and 5-year follow-up. Between-group differences were analyzed using intent-to-treat linear mixed models. The relationship between baseline muscle strength and osteoarthritis progression (Kellgren/Lawrence ≥1 grade increase) were assessed using logistic regression models. RESULTS: We found statistically significant between-group differences favoring exercise therapy at 3 months (quadriceps -0.30 Nm/kg [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -0.40, -0.20]; hamstrings -0.10 Nm/kg [95% CI -0.15, -0.04]) and 12 months (quadriceps -0.13 Nm/kg [95% CI -0.23, -0.03]; hamstrings -0.08 Nm/kg [95% CI -0.14, -0.03]). At 5 years, between-group differences were -0.10 Nm/kg (95% CI -0.21, 0.01) for quadriceps and -0.07 Nm/kg (95% CI -0.13, -0.01) for hamstrings. Quadriceps muscle weakness at baseline was associated with knee osteoarthritis progression over 5 years, with adjusted odds ratio of 1.40 for every 0.2 Nm/kg decrease (95% CI 1.15, 1.71). The adjusted odds ratio for hamstrings was 1.14 (95% CI 0.97, 1.35) for every 0.1 Nm/kg decrease. CONCLUSION: Exercise therapy was effective in improving muscle strength at 3- and 12-month follow-up compared to partial meniscectomy, but the effect was attenuated at 5 years. Quadriceps muscle weakness at baseline was associated with higher odds of osteoarthritis progression over 5 years.

Low Rates of Radiographic Knee Osteoarthritis 5 Years After ACL Reconstruction or Rehabilitation Alone: The Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients and clinicians often struggle to choose the optimal management strategy for posttraumatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. An evaluation of radiographic outcomes after a decision-making and treatment algorithm applicable in clinical practice can help to inform future recommendations and treatment choices. PURPOSE: To describe and compare 5-year radiographic outcomes and knee pain in individuals who had gone through our decision-making and treatment algorithm and chosen (1) early (<6 months) ACL reconstruction (ACLR) with pre- and postoperative rehabilitation, (2) delayed (>6 months) ACLR with pre- and postoperative rehabilitation, or (3) progressive rehabilitation alone. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: We included 276 patients with unilateral ACL injury from a prospective cohort study. Patients chose management using a shared decision-making process and treatment algorithm, and 5-year postoperative radiographs of the index and contralateral knees were assessed using the Kellgren and Lawrence (K&L) classification and minimum joint space width measurements. We defined radiographic tibiofemoral OA as K&L grade ≥2 and knee pain as a Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Pain ≤72. To further explore early radiographic changes, we included alternative cutoffs for radiographic knee OA using K&L grade ≥2/osteophyte (definite osteophyte without joint space narrowing) and K&L grade ≥1. RESULTS: At 5 years, 64% had undergone early ACLR; 11%, delayed ACLR; and 25%, progressive rehabilitation alone. Radiographic examination was attended by 187 patients (68%). Six percent of the cohort had radiographic tibiofemoral OA (K&L grade ≥2) in the index knee; 4%, in the contralateral knee. Using the alternative cutoffs at K&L grade ≥2/osteophyte and K&L grade ≥1, the corresponding numbers were 20% and 33% in the index knee and 18% and 29% in the contralateral knee. Six percent had a painful index knee. There were no statistically significant differences in any radiographic outcomes or knee pain among the 3 management groups. CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant differences in any 5-year radiographic outcomes or knee pain among the 3 management groups. Very few of the patients who participated in our decision-making and treatment algorithm had knee OA or knee pain at 5 years.

On a Trajectory for Success-9 in Every 10 People With a Degenerative Meniscus Tear Have Improved Knee Function Within 2 Years After Treatment: A Secondary Exploratory Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To identify trajectories of patient-reported knee function over 5 years in patients with degenerative meniscal tears, and to explore whether baseline characteristics were associated with trajectories of sport and recreational function. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: We conducted a secondary exploratory analysis of the Odense-Oslo Meniscectomy Versus Exercise randomized controlled trial. Patient-reported knee function was assessed with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at baseline, 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years. We used group-based trajectory modeling to identify subgroups of patients who followed distinctive patterns of change. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine the associations of patient demographics, knee function, and disease-related factors with KOOS sport and recreational function subscale trajectories. RESULTS: The analysis of data from a sample of 140 participants identified 3 trajectories for all KOOS subscales: (1) low, minimal improvement (10%-12% of the participants), (2) moderate, gradual improvement (20%-36%), and (3) high, early improvement (53%-70%). Baseline prognostic factors for deteriorating function in sport and recreational activities were higher body mass index, poorer mental health, greater knee pain, lower perceived knee function, poorer quadriceps and hamstrings muscle strength, poorer functional performance, more meniscal extrusion, and radiographic signs of knee osteoarthritis. CONCLUSION: We found 3 distinct trajectories of patient-reported knee function over 5 years: (1) low, minimal improvement, (2) moderate, gradual improvement, and (3) high, early improvement. Nine in every 10 participants improved at least gradually over 2 years after diagnosis of a degenerative meniscal tear. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(6):289-297. Epub 10 May 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10025.