Clinical Relevance of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Patients Who Have Undergone Total Hip Arthroplasty: a Systematic Review

Overview

Journal Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

Specialties Emergency Medicine
General Surgery
Orthopedics

Date 2024 Sep 24

PMID 39316103

Authors

Filippo Migliorini

Nicola Maffulli

Michael Kurt Memminger

Francesco Simeone

Bjorn Rath

Thorsten Huber

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: In orthopaedic research, it is crucial to determine changes that are statistically significant and clinically meaningful. One approach to accomplish this is by calculating the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID), the Clinically Important Differences (CID), the Minimum Detectable Change (MDC), the Minimal Important Change (MIC), and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) values. These tools assist medical professionals in comprehending the patient's viewpoint, enabling them to establish treatment objectives that align with patients' desires and expectations. The present systematic review investigated the MCID, MIC, CID, MDC, and PASS of the most used PROMs to assess patients who have undergone THA.

Methods: This systematic review followed the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed were accessed in March 2024 without time constraints or additional filters. All the clinical investigations which evaluated data tools (MCID, MIC, CID, MDC, and PASS) to assess the clinical relevance of PROMs in THA were accessed. Articles in Spanish, Italian, German, and English were eligible. Studies with levels of evidence I to III were eligible.

Results: Data from 100,824 patients were collected. All relevant demographic data were analysed and summarised. In addition, the MCID, MIC, CID, MDC and PASS of the COMI, HOOS, SF-36, OHS, Oxford-12, PROMIS-PF, SF-12, and WOMAC scores for THA were determined.

Conclusion: Current evidence recommends to collect MCIDs based on anchors routinely. These values should be used as complementary tools to determine the clinical effectiveness of a treatment instead of solely relying on statistically significant improvements.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Citing Articles

No Effect of Cigarette Smoking in the Outcome of Arthroscopic Management for Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Systematic Review.

Lucenti L, Maffulli N, Bardazzi T, Pipino G, Pappalardo G, Migliorini F J Clin Med. 2024; 13(23).

PMID: 39685673 PMC: 11642028. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13237214.

References

Migliorini F, Cuozzo F, Oliva F, Eschweiler J, Hildebrand F, Maffulli N . CT-based navigation for total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Eur J Med Res. 2023; 28(1):443. PMC: 10583311. DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01437-4. View

Supra R, Supra R, Agrawal D . Surgical Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Orthop Sports Med. 2023; 5(2):232-240. PMC: 10310317. DOI: 10.26502/josm.511500106. View

Migliorini F, Biagini M, Rath B, Meisen N, Tingart M, Eschweiler J . Total hip arthroplasty: minimally invasive surgery or not? Meta-analysis of clinical trials. Int Orthop. 2018; 43(7):1573-1582. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-4124-3. View

Evans J, Evans J, Walker R, Blom A, Whitehouse M, Sayers A . How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2019; 393(10172):647-654. PMC: 6376618. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31665-9. View

Salman L, Alzobi O, Al-Ani A, Hantouly A, Al-Juboori M, Ahmed G . The outcomes of total hip arthroplasty in developmental dysplasia of hip versus osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023; 34(1):1-8. PMC: 10771616. DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03635-6. View

Migliorini F, Pintore A, Eschweiler J, Oliva F, Hildebrand F, Maffulli N . Factors influencing the outcomes of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Orthop Surg Res. 2022; 17(1):281. PMC: 9118783. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03168-4. View

Alessio-Mazzola M, Colombo P, Barducci N, Ghezzi E, Zagra L, Caldora P . Direct anterior approach with conventional instruments versus robotic posterolateral approach in elective total hip replacement for primary osteoarthritis: a case-control study. J Orthop Traumatol. 2024; 25(1):9. PMC: 10881946. DOI: 10.1186/s10195-024-00753-7. View

Sakai H, Watanabe N, Kuroyanagi G, Fukuoka M, Usami T, Ueki Y . Clinical and radiographic outcomes of primary total hip arthroplasty with the revelation hip system using density mapping. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022; 33(2):435-440. DOI: 10.1007/s00590-022-03210-5. View

Migliorini F, Maffulli N, Trivellas M, Eschweiler J, Hildebrand F, Betsch M . Total hip arthroplasty compared to bipolar and unipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced hip fractures in the elderly: a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022; 48(4):2655-2666. PMC: 9360085. DOI: 10.1007/s00068-022-01905-2. View

10.

Learmonth I, Young C, Rorabeck C . The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007; 370(9597):1508-19. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7. View

11.

Bastian J . Total Hip Arthroplasty-Current Challenges. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023; 59(6). PMC: 10305566. DOI: 10.3390/medicina59061011. View

12.

Copay A, Eyberg B, Chung A, Zurcher K, Chutkan N, Spangehl M . Minimum Clinically Important Difference: Current Trends in the Orthopaedic Literature, Part II: Lower Extremity: A Systematic Review. JBJS Rev. 2018; 6(9):e2. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.17.00160. View

13.

Nunley B, Mulligan E, Chhabra A, Fey N, Wells J . Relationships between self-perceived and clinical expression of pain and function differ based on the underlying pathology of the human hip. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023; 24(1):635. PMC: 10405504. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06768-1. View

14.

Jin H, He M, Xie W, Xiong Z, Deng Z, Li Y . Research Trends of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopedic Medical Practices: A Bibliometric and Visualized Study. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023; 59(9). PMC: 10536719. DOI: 10.3390/medicina59091664. View

15.

Walsh J, Huddleston H, Alzein M, Wong S, Forsythe B, Verma N . The Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient-Acceptable Symptomatic State after Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil. 2022; 4(2):e661-e678. PMC: 9042905. DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2021.12.009. View

16.

Stern B, Pila S, Joseph L, Rothrock N, Franklin P . Patients' perspectives on the benefits of feedback on patient-reported outcome measures in a web-based personalized decision report for hip and knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1):806. PMC: 9395772. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05764-1. View

17.

Ackerman I, Soh S, Harris I, Cashman K, Heath E, Lorimer M . Performance of the HOOS-12 and KOOS-12 instruments for evaluating outcomes from joint replacement surgery. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2021; 29(6):815-823. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2021.03.003. View

18.

Holmenlund C, Overgaard S, Bilberg R, Varnum C . Evaluation of the Oxford Hip Score: Does it still have content validity? Interviews of total hip arthroplasty patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2021; 19(1):237. PMC: 8501736. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-021-01869-8. View

19.

Bellamy N, BUCHANAN W, Goldsmith C, Campbell J, Stitt L . Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988; 15(12):1833-40. View

20.

Pulik L, Romaniuk K, Jaskiewicz K, Wojtynski P, Legosz P, Maldyk P . An update on joint-specific outcome measures in total hip replacement. Reumatologia. 2020; 58(2):107-115. PMC: 7249528. DOI: 10.5114/reum.2020.95366. View