Can KOOS-PS be replaced with a simple anchor question in patients after total knee arthroplasty?: an agreement study of 2,478 primary surgeries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.42098Abstract
Background and purpose: Physical function and pain are the most important outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). These can be evaluated by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), or by an anchor question. The primary aim of the study was to evaluate whether a simple anchor question can replace KOOS-PS in assessing postoperative knee function until 1-year follow-up, evaluated by analyzing the agreement between the 2 methods using the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Secondary aims were pain (NRS) at rest and during mobilization.
Methods: This is a diagnostic accuracy study with primary TKAs performed between 2010 and 2022. The surgeries were categorized as improved (I) or worsened (W) based on a dichotomized anchor question related to self-perceived change in physical function, and the dichotomized change in KOOS-PS until 1-year follow-up. This led to 4 groups: (II, IW, WI, and WW).
Results: Agreement was found with a DOR of 11.3 (CI 7.9–16.2). 2,335 (94%) reported improved function on the anchor question and 143 (6%) worsened function. Among those with improved anchor 2,132 (91%) had improved KOOS-PS, but among those with worsened anchor only 74 (52%) had worsened KOOS-PS. Pain at 1-year follow-up was lower in the groups reporting improved anchor.
Conclusion: The KOOS-PS can be replaced with an anchor question to assess change in function until 1 year. However, the KOOS-PS might be a valuable supplement in patients reporting worsened anchor as only half of those had worsened KOOS-PS.
Downloads
References
Bourne R B, Chesworth B M, Davis A M, Mahomed N N, Charron K D. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468(1): 57-63. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9.
Hafkamp F J, Gosens T, de Vries J, den Oudsten B L. Do dissatisfied patients have unrealistic expectations? A systematic review and best-evidence synthesis in knee and hip arthroplasty patients. EFORT Open Rev 2020; 5(4): 226-40. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190015.
Lützner C, Beyer F, David L, Lützner J. Fulfilment of patients’ mandatory expectations are crucial for satisfaction: a study amongst 352 patients after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31(9): 3755-64. doi: 10.1007/s00167-022-07301-y.
Munn J S, Culliton S E, Bryant D M, MacDonald S J, Chesworth B M. Can met expectations moderate the relationship between pain/function and satisfaction in total knee arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty 2021; 36(6): 1942-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.01.028.
Wilson I, Bohm E, Lübbeke A, Lyman S, Overgaard S, Rolfson O, et al. Orthopaedic registries with patient-reported outcome measures. EFORT Open Rev 2019; 4(6): 357-67. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180080.
Halawi M J, Jongbloed W, Baron S, Savoy L, Cote M P, Lieberman J R. Patient-reported outcome measures are not a valid proxy for patient satisfaction in total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.09.033.
Bonnefoy-Mazure A, Lübbeke A, Miozzari H H, Armand S, Sagawa Y J, Turcot K, et al. Walking speed and maximal knee flexion during gait after total knee arthroplasty: minimal clinically important improvement is not determinable; patient acceptable symptom state is potentially useful. J Arthroplasty 2020; 35(10): 2865-71.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.05.038.
Wik T S, Klaksvik J, Husby O S, Rasch A, Winther S B. Patient-reported outcome after primary and aseptic revision hip arthroplasty: 1-year follow-up of 3,559 primary and 406 revision THAs in an institutional registry. Acta Orthop 2022; 93: 132-7. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2021.852.
Jeon Y S, Lee J W, Kim S H, Kim S G, Kim Y H, Bae J H. Determining the substantial clinical benefit values for patient-reported outcome scores after primary ACL reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med 2022; 10(5): 23259671221091795. doi: 10.1177/23259671221091795.
Winther S B, Klaksvik J, Wik T S, Husby O S, Egeberg T, Snildalsli S, et al. Higher dissatisfaction rate following revision compared with primary total knee arthroplasty: 1-year follow-up of 2151 primary and 235 aseptic revision surgeries. Orthopedics 2023; 46(1): e52-e57 doi: 10.3928/01477447-20221031-09.
Murphy M T, Vardi R, Journeaux S F, Whitehouse S L. A patient’s recollection of pre-operative status is not accurate one year after arthroplasty of the hip or knee. Bone Joint J 2015; 97-b(8): 1070-5. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.97b8.35809.
Masud S, Piche J D, Muralidharan A, Nassr A, Aleem I. Do patients accurately recall their preoperative symptoms after elective orthopedic procedures? Cureus 2023; 15(3): e36810. doi: 10.7759/cureus.36810.
Yeoman T F M, Clement N D, Macdonald D, Moran M. Recall of preoperative Oxford Hip and Knee Scores one year after arthroplasty is an alternative and reliable technique when used for a cohort of patients. Bone Joint Res 2018; 7(5): 351-6. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.75.Bjr-2017-0259.R1.
Perruccio A V, Lohmander L S, Canizares M, Tennant A, Hawker G A, Conaghan P G, et al. The development of a short measure of physical function for knee OA KOOS-Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS): an OARSI/OMERACT initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008; 16(5): 542-50. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.12.014.
Winther S B , Foss O A, Wik T S, Davis S P, Engdal M, Jessen V, et al. 1-year follow-up of 920 hip and knee arthroplasty patients after implementing fast-track. Acta Orthop 2015; 86(1): 78-85. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.957089.
Baker P N, Rushton S, Jameson SS , Reed M, Gregg P, Deehan D J. Patient satisfaction with total knee replacement cannot be predicted from pre-operative variables alone: a cohort study from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-b(10): 1359-65. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.95b10.32281.
Wang Y, Yin M, Zhu S, Chen X, Zhou H, Qian W. Patient-reported outcome measures used in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Bone Joint Res 2021; 10(3): 203-17. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.103.Bjr-2020-0268.R1.
Braaksma C, Wolterbeek N, Veen M R, Prinsen C A C, Ostelo R. Systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score – Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score – Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2020; 28(12): 1525-38. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2020.08.004.
Howell J, Xu M, Duncan C P, Masri B A, Garbuz D S. A comparison between patient recall and concurrent measurement of preoperative quality of life outcome in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2008; 23(6): 843-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.07.020.
Rodriguez-Merchan E C. Patient satisfaction following primary total knee arthroplasty: contributing factors. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2021; 9(4): 379-86. doi: 10.22038/abjs.2020.46395.2274.
Kahlenberg C A, Nwachukwu B U, McLawhorn A S, Cross M B, Cornell C N, Padgett D E. Patient satisfaction after total knee replacement: a systematic review. HSS J 2018; 14(2): 192-201. doi: 10.1007/s11420-018-9614-8.
Gunaratne R, Pratt D N, Banda J, Fick D P, Khan R J K, Robertson B W. Patient dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32(12): 3854-60. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.07.021.
Neuprez A, Delcour J P, Fatemi F, Gillet P, Crielaard J M, Bruyere O, et al. Patients’ expectations impact their satisfaction following total hip or knee arthroplasty. PLoS One 2016; 11(12): e0167911. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167911.
Hawker G A, Conner-Spady B L, Bohm E, Dunbar M J, Jones C A, Ravi B, et al. Patients’ preoperative expectations of total knee arthroplasty and satisfaction with outcomes at one year: a prospective cohort study. Arthritis Rheumatol 2021; 73(2): 223-31. doi: 10.1002/art.41510.
Mannion A F, Kämpfen S, Munzinger U, Kramers-de Quervain I. The role of patient expectations in predicting outcome after total knee arthroplasty. Arthritis Res Ther 2009; 11(5): R139. doi: 10.1186/ar2811.
Sakellariou V I, Poultsides L A, Ma Y, Bae J, Liu S, Sculco T P. Risk assessment for chronic pain and patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2016; 39(1): 55-62. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20151228-06.
Kim M S, Koh I J, Sung Y G, Park D C, Yoon E J, In Y. Influence of increased pain sensitivity on patient-reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30(3): 782-90. doi: 10.1007/s00167-021-06455-5.
Iken A R, Poolman R W, Gademan M G J. Data quality assessment of interventional trials in public trial databases. J Clin Epidemiol 2024: 111516. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111516.
Davis A M, Perruccio A V, Canizares M, Hawker G A, Roos E M, Maillefert J F, et al. Comparative, validity and responsiveness of the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS to the WOMAC physical function subscale in total joint replacement for osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17(7): 843-7. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2009.01.005.
Krogsgaard M R, Brodersen J, Christensen K B, Siersma V, Kreiner S, Jensen J, et al. What is a PROM and why do we need it? Scand J Med Sci Sports 2021; 31(5): 967-71. doi: 10.1111/sms.13892.
van der Willik E M, Terwee C B, Bos W J W, Hemmelder M , Jager K J, Zoccali C, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): making sense of individual PROM scores and changes in PROM scores over time. Nephrology (Carlton) 2021; 26(5): 391-9. doi: 10.1111/nep.13843.
Batailler C, Lording T, De Massari D, Witvoet-Braam S, Bini S, Lustig S. Predictive models for clinical outcomes in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic analysis. Arthroplast Today 2021; 9: 1-15. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.03.013.
Chang J, Fu M, Cao P, Ding C, Wang D. Patient-reported quality of life before and after total knee arthroplasty: a multicenter observational study. Patient Prefer Adherence 2022; 16:737-48. doi: 10.2147/ppa.S357632.
Pronk Y, Peters M, Brinkman J M. Is patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty predictable using patient characteristics and preoperative patient-reported outcomes? J Arthroplasty 2021; 36(7): 2458-65. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2021.02.064.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Siri Bjørgen Winther, Anders Sjøstrøm, Sølvi Liabakk-Selli, Olav A Foss, Tina S Wik, Jomar Klaksvik
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
