Background: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 has been used to measure postoperative disability in several clinical trials and cohort studies. It is uncertain what the minimal clinically important difference or patient-acceptable symptom state scores are for this scale in patients recovering from surgery.
Methods: The authors analyzed prospectively collected data from three studies that measured disability 3 and 6 months after surgery. Three distribution-based methods (0.3 multiplied by SD, standard error of the measurement, and 5% range) and two anchor-based methods (anchored to two patient-rated health status questions and separately to unplanned hospital readmission) were averaged to estimate the minimal clinically important difference for the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score converted to a percentage scale. Scores consistent with a patient-acceptable symptom state and clinically significant disability were determined by an anchored 75th centile method.
Results: Data from 4,361 patients were analyzed. The average minimal clinically important difference estimate for the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 was 5%, with similar estimates in patients with or without preoperative disability. The patient-acceptable symptom state score was 16%, and the score consistent with at least moderate clinically significant disability was 35%. Using these estimates, between baseline and 6 months after surgery, 21% of patients had a significant increase in disability, and 73% achieved a patient-acceptable symptom state.
Conclusions: A change in World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score of 5% or more after surgery is consistent with a clinically important change in disability. Patients with a score less than 16% after surgery have an acceptable symptom state and can be considered as disability-free, whereas patients with a score of 35% or more can be considered as having at least moderate clinically significant disability.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000003240 | DOI Listing |
Medicine (Baltimore)
November 2024
Department of Orthopedics, Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Medicine, Izmir, Turkey.
The correlation between clinical outcomes and preoperative/postoperative measures of the lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) will help establish the cutoff values for this measurement and determine whether to obtain it from the lateral acetabular rim (LCEAR) or the lateral end of the sourcil (LCEAS). The hypothesis was that the LCEAS would be more sensitive than the LCEAR. An upper cutoff value of LCEA could predict better functional outcomes in FAI patients.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Shoulder Elbow Surg
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Background: Surgical techniques for biceps tenodesis vary in approach, fixation strategy, and anatomic location without clear superior technique for this common procedure.
Hypothesis/purpose: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate a randomized cohort of patients undergoing arthroscopic suprapectoral (ASBT) with interference screw fixation using an inlay technique versus mini-open subpectoral (MOBT) with a unicortical button implant using an onlay technique with regards to 1) clinical outcome measures and 2) structural healing as evaluated by ultrasound.
Methods: From May 2017 to April 2021, patients undergoing biceps tenodesis were preoperatively randomized to either ASBT or MOBT.
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol
January 2025
Southwest of London Orthopaedic Elective Centre, Epsom, UK.
Background: The aim was to assess whether the postoperative Oxford Hip Score (OHS) demonstrated a ceiling effect at 1 or 2 years after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to identify which patients are more likely to achieve a ceiling score and whether this limits assessment of their outcome.
Methods: A retrospective cohort of 7871 patients undergoing primary THA was identified from an established arthroplasty database. Patient demographics, ASA grade, socioeconomic status, OHS and EuroQol questionnaire were collected preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years postoperatively.
Clin Orthop Relat Res
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
Background: A variety of clinically important benchmarks of success (CIBS) have been defined for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) to quantify success. However, it is unclear how the preoperative status of the patient influences their likelihood of achieving each CIBS.
Questions/purposes: (1) What proportion of patients achieve commonly used CIBS after TSA? (2) Is there a relationship between a patients' preoperative function and their probability of achieving different CIBS? (3) Does there exist preoperative ranges for each outcome measure that are associated with greater achievement of CIBS?
Methods: We retrospectively queried a multicenter shoulder arthroplasty database for primary anatomic TSA (aTSA) and reverse TSA (rTSA).
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, University of Washington Medical Center, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Box 356500, Seattle, WA 98195-6500. Electronic address:
Background: Clinically important improvement after total shoulder arthroplasty is often assessed with shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) quantifying reduction in pain and restoration in function. It is unclear if commonly utilized threshold such as minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), or patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), represent optimal improvement from the patients' perspective. The objectives of this study were to utilize the Simple Shoulder Test to: 1) compare commonly utilized thresholds for change in score and final score to thresholds optimized to patient satisfaction using receiver operative characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, and 2) determine the impact of using different thresholds on reporting of independent predictors of successful outcome in terms of patient satisfaction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!