scholarly journals 3196 Assessing the Relationship between Resilience and Pain Catastrophizing in Patient Reported Outcomes following Total Knee Replacement

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 119-119
Author(s):  
Vesta Nwankwo ◽  
William Jiranek ◽  
Steven George ◽  
Janet Bettger
Keyword(s):  
Missing Values ◽  
Latent Class ◽  
Pain Catastrophizing ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Measurement Information ◽  
Preoperative Treatment ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: The aim of the present study is to explore the relationships between resilience, pain catastrophizing, and functional outcomes in pre-and post-operative TKR patients. The primary outcome is the ability of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) to predict function using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR.) and overall health on the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Global Health (PROMIS GH). METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Recruited patients will provide informed consent during in-person office visits. At the pre-surgery intake appointment, patients will provide demographic information and complete baseline questionnaires assessing resilience, pain catastrophizing, knee stiffness, pain, and function, and impression of overall health. In-person or electronic follow-up assessments will be administered post-surgery at 6-week, 3-month, and 6-month appointments. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We aim to recruit 150 patients for this study. We do not expect a difference in sociodemographic characteristics of the patient sample. P-values will be based on t-tests and correlations calculated by comparing only non-missing values. Each outcome measure will be examined at each time point and trajectories will be calculated to determine the change in each outcome over time. Using latent class growth modeling we will examine individual change over time for each outcome (BRS, PCS, PROMIS GH, and KOOS JR.), and the association of resilience and pain with change in function (KOOS, JR. total score) and overall health (PROMIS GH). DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: To our knowledge, this is the only known study that will compare resilience, pain catastrophizing and longitudinal health outcomes in a single paradigm. Results will hopefully inform the design and implementation of future studies that will assess the impact of preoperative treatment of vulnerable patients. The ultimate goal is to improve functional recovery by using pre-identified psychological constructs as intervention points. Ideally, the same measures would be implemented, however, details of this plan will be established following completion of this study.

scholarly journals Patient-reported outcomes in spine surgery: past, current, and future directions

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel A. Finkelstein ◽  
Carolyn E. Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Objective Measures ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Valuable Adjunct ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

The purpose of this article is to review the current state of outcome measurement in spine surgery, with an emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The commonly used generic and disease-specific outcome measures used in spinal surgery and research will be discussed. The authors will introduce the concepts of response shift and appraisal processes, which may affect the face validity of PROMs, as well as their interpretation over time. It is not uncommon for there to be a discrepancy between the observed and expected outcome, which is not wholly explainable by objective measures. Current work on understanding how appraisal affects outcome measurement will be discussed, and future directions will be suggested to facilitate the continued evolution of PROMs.There has been an evolution in the way clinicians measure outcomes following spinal surgery. In moving from purely physical, objective measures to a growing emphasis on the patient’s perspective, spine surgery outcomes are better able to integrate the impact at multiple levels of relevant change. Appraisal concepts and methods are gaining traction as ways to understand the cognitive processes underlying PROMs over time. Measurement of appraisal is a valuable adjunct to the current spine outcome tools.

scholarly journals Outcomes of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Unilateral Versus Bilateral Interbody Cages

Neurospine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 854-862
Author(s):  
Conor P. Lynch ◽  
Elliot D.K. Cha ◽  
Augustus J. Rush III ◽  
Caroline N. Jadczak ◽  
Shruthi Mohan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Measurement Information ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bilateral Group ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Unilateral Group

Objective: To assess the impact of bilateral versus unilateral interbody cages on outcomes for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) procedures.Methods: A retrospective review for primary, elective, single-level MIS TLIF procedures with bilateral posterior instrumentation from 2008–2020 was performed. Patients were grouped according to unilateral or bilateral interbody cage use. Procedures performed without static interbody cages or indicated for trauma, infection, malignancy were excluded. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item Short Form health survey physical composite score (SF-12 PCS), PatientReported Outcome Measurement Information System physical function (PROMIS-PF). PROs were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Change in PROs (Δ) was calculated and compared between groups. Achievement of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated using established values from the literature. Achievement rates were compared between groups using logistic regression.Results: The study included 151 patients, with 111 unilateral and 40 bilateral cage placements. Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, and insurance status differed between groups (p < 0.050). Prevalence of degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis (both p ≤ 0.002), operative level (p = 0.003), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.022) significantly differed between groups. The unilateral group had lower 1-year arthrodesis rates (p = 0.035). Preoperative VAS leg (p = 0.017) and SF-12 PCS (p = 0.045) were worse for the unilateral group. ΔPROMIS-PF was greater for the bilateral group at 2 years (p = 0.001). Majority of patients achieved an overall MCID for all PROs, except VAS leg (bilateral group).Conclusion: While preoperative status and postoperative arthrodesis rates differed, patients achieved an MCID at similar rates regardless of use of unilateral or bilateral cages.

scholarly journals Quality of life assessments in clinical practice using either the EORTC-QLQ-C30 or the SEIOQL-DW: a randomized study

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Åsa Kettis ◽  
Hanna Fagerlind ◽  
Jan-Erik Frödin ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Lena Ring
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background Effective patient-physician communication can improve patient understanding, agreement on treatment and adherence. This may, in turn, impact on clinical outcomes and patient quality of life (QoL). One way to improve communication is by using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Heretofore, studies of the impact of using PROMs in clinical practice have mostly evaluated the use of standardized PROMs. However, there is reason to believe that individualized instruments may be more appropriate for this purpose. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the standardized QoL-instrument, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life C-30 (EORTC-QOL-C30) and the individualized QoL instrument, the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW), in clinical practice. Methods In a prospective, open-label, controlled intervention study at two hospital out-patient clinics, 390 patients with gastrointestinal cancer were randomly assigned either to complete the EORTC-QOL-C30 or the SEIQoL-DW immediately before the consultation, with their responses being shared with their physician. This was repeated in 3–5 consultations over a period of 4–6 months. The primary outcome measure was patients’ health-related QoL, as measured by FACIT-G. Patients’ satisfaction with the consultation and survival were secondary outcomes. Results There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to study outcomes. Neither intervention instrument resulted in any significant changes in health-related QoL, or in any of the secondary outcomes, over time. This may reflect either a genuine lack of effect or sub-optimization of the intervention. Since there was no comparison to standard care an effect in terms of lack of deterioration over time cannot be excluded. Conclusions Future studies should focus on the implementation process, including the training of physicians to use the instruments and their motivation for doing so. The effects of situational use of standardized or individualized instruments should also be explored. The effectiveness of the different approaches may depend on contextual factors including physician and patient preferences.

T3 Are Burns a Chronic Condition: Examining Physical and Mental Functioning up to 20 Years After Injury

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S2-S3
Author(s):  
Callie Abouzeid ◽  
Audrey E Wolfe ◽  
Gretchen J Carrougher ◽  
Nicole S Gibran ◽  
Radha K Holavanahalli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
National Database ◽  
Time Points ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Burn Survivors ◽  
Population Demographic ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Introduction Burn survivors often face many long-term physical and psychological symptoms associated with their injury. To date, however, few studies have examined the impact of burn injuries on quality of life beyond 2 years post-injury. The purpose of this study is to examine the physical and mental well-being of burn survivors up to 20 years after injury. Methods Data from the Burn Model System National Database (1997–2020) were analyzed. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at discharge with a recall of preinjury status, and then at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after injury. Outcomes examined were the Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) of the Short Form-12. Trajectories were developed using linear mixed methods model with repeated measures of PCS and MCS scores over time and controlling for demographic and clinical variables. The model fitted score trajectory was generated with 95% confidence intervals to demonstrate score changes over time and associations with covariates. Results The study population included 420 adult burn survivors with a mean age of 42.4 years. The population was mainly male (66%) and white (76.4%) with a mean burn size of 21.5% and length of hospital stay of 31.3 days. Higher PCS scores were associated with follow-up time points closer to injury, shorter hospital stay, and younger age. Similarly, higher MCS scores were associated with earlier follow-up time points, shorter hospital stay, female gender, and non-perineal burns. MCS trajectories are demonstrated in the Figure. Conclusions Burn survivors’ physical and mental health worsened over time. Such a trend is different from previous reported results for mental health in the general population. Demographic and clinical predictors of recovery over time are identified.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document