scholarly journals Conservative management acutely improves functional movement and clinical outcomes in patients with pre-arthritic hip pain

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan P McGovern ◽  
RobRoy L Martin ◽  
Amy L Phelps ◽  
Benjamin R Kivlan ◽  
Beth Nickel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Conservative Management ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Hip Pain ◽  
Analysis Of Covariance ◽  
Functional Movement ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Conservative management for individuals with pre-arthritic hip pain is commonly prescribed prior to consideration of surgical management. The purpose of this study is to determine if patients with pre-arthritic hip pain will improve their functional movement control and clinical outcome measures following the implementation of physical therapy and a home-exercise programme. Information was retrospectively collected on consecutive patients and included: demographics, diagnosis, initial and follow-up evaluation of the single leg squat test (SLST) and step-down test (SDT), and patient-reported outcome measures. An independent t-test and one-way analysis of covariance were performed for continuous patient-reported outcome measures and a Fisher’s exact test was performed for patient satisfaction. Forty-six patients (31 female and 15 male) diagnosed with pre-arthritic hip pain were included. A total of 30 patients improved their functional movement control during performance of the SLST, whereas 31 patients improved performance of the SDT. There was a statistically significant difference between patients that improved and did not improve (P ≤ 0.017). Patients with pre-arthritic hip pain who improved their functional movement control following a prescribed rehabilitation intervention are likely to report less pain and greater functional ability in their daily and sports-related activities. This study supports conservative management to acutely improve outcomes for patients with pre-arthritic hip pain.

scholarly journals Mid-term Prospective Follow-up of Ankle Fracture Fixation Using Patient Reported Outcome Measures

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011418S0039
Author(s):  
Paul Rai ◽  
Jitendra Mangwani
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Ankle Fracture ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Ankle Fractures ◽  
Anatomical Reduction ◽  
Clear Space ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Category: Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is a common procedure to stabilise unstable ankle fractures. Anatomical reduction and stable fixation is desirable to achieve good clinical and radiological outcome after this injury. This prospective study examines the correlation between mid-term patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and quality of fracture reduction of adult patients with ankle fractures treated with ORIF. Methods: A total of 100 patients with unstable ankle fracture who underwent ORIF were prospectively entered into the study between Nov 2013 to Oct 2014. Exclusion criteria were: age <18 years, pathological or open fractures and patients with cognitive impairment. Two independent observers assessed fracture patterns and quality of reduction. Fixations were analysed using Pettrone’s criteria including assessment of fracture displacement, medial clear space and tibiofibular overlap. Patients were followed up at two years post-operatively with postal questionnaires. Validated PROMs, Olerud-Molander Score (OMAS) and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) were used. For both scores a higher number indicated a better result. Co-morbidities and infection data were collated from Hospital records. Results: At 2 years post-op there were 5 deceased patients,17 did not have accessible radiographs and there was a 65% response rate to questionnaires. 46 patients were included in the final study group with a mean age of 45 (16-90). There was 1 Weber A fracture, 26 Weber B, 16 Weber C and 3 Medial malleolus fractures. 7% had Diabetes Mellitus, 22% were smokers. The mean OMAS score was 71.4(SD26.9) and LEFS score 56.7(SD25.9). There was no significant difference in PROM scores when fracture fragment reduction was optimised. There was a significant improvement in PROMs with low medial clear space and high tibiofibular overlap. Conclusion: This study reports a good correlation between quality of reduction and favourable PROMs at 2 years post ORIF ankle fracture. Reduced medial clear space and increased tibiofibular overlap were most associated with good outcome scores. Anatomical reduction of fracture fragments did not appear to affect PROMs on its own. There was very little infection in this cohort to confound the results. We would advise careful consideration of medial clear space and tibiofibular overlap in particular at time of fixation of unstable ankle fractures.

scholarly journals Are responders to patient health surveys representative of those invited to participate? An analysis of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Pilot from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0254196
Author(s):  
Ian A. Harris ◽  
Kara Cashman ◽  
Michelle Lorimer ◽  
Yi Peng ◽  
Ilana Ackerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Joint Replacement ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Telephone Call ◽  
Joint Replacement Registry ◽  
Asa Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Background Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to evaluate surgical outcome in patients undergoing joint replacement surgery, however routine collection from the target population is often incomplete. Representative samples are required to allow inference from the sample to the population. Although higher capture rates are desired, the extent to which this improves the representativeness of the sample is not known. We aimed to measure the representativeness of data collected using an electronic PROMs capture system with or without telephone call follow up, and any differences in PROMS reporting between electronic and telephone call follow up. Methods Data from a pilot PROMs program within a large national joint replacement registry were examined. Telephone call follow up was used for people that failed to respond electronically. Data were collected pre-operatively and at 6 months post-operatively. Responding groups (either electronic only or electronic plus telephone call follow up) were compared to non-responders based on patient characteristics (joint replaced, bilaterality, age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score and Body Mass Index (BMI)) using chi squared test or ANOVA, and PROMs for the two responder groups were compared using generalised linear models adjusted for age and sex. The analysis was restricted to those undergoing primary elective hip, knee or shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis. Results Pre-operatively, 73.2% of patients responded electronically and telephone follow-up of non-responders increased this to 91.4%. Pre-operatively, patients responding electronically, compared to all others, were on average younger, more likely to be female, and healthier (lower ASA score). Similar differences were found when telephone follow up was included in the responding group. There were little (if any) differences in the post-operative comparisons, where electronic responders were on average one year younger and were more likely to have a lower ASA score compared to those not responding electronically, but there was no significant difference in sex or BMI. PROMs were similar between those reporting electronically and those reporting by telephone. Conclusion Patients undergoing total joint replacement who provide direct electronic PROMs data are younger, healthier and more likely to be female than non-responders, but these differences are small, particularly for post-operative data collection. The addition of telephone call follow up to electronic contact does not provide a more representative sample. Electronic-only follow up of patients undergoing joint replacement provides a satisfactory representation of the population invited to participate.

scholarly journals Exaggerated Pre-Operative Patient Reported Visual Analog Pain Scale, A Retrospective review of 201 consecutive surgical patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011417S0002
Author(s):  
Kevin Martin ◽  
Laura Dawson ◽  
Kenneth Cameron ◽  
Jeffrey Van Buren
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Nursing Staff ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Office Visit ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Category: Patient Reported Outcomes Introduction/Purpose: The visual analog scale (VAS) is a reliable and validated measure of patient reported acute pain. The clinical implications of the VAS in patients with chronic pain or postoperative pain is less clear. As patient reported outcome measures are becoming the standard of care throughout the orthopaedic community, interpretation and clinical applications are still under investigation. The aim of the current study was to evaluate preoperative patient reported VAS score reported to nursing staff as compared to the surgeon at the same clinical visit. Our hypothesis was that there would be no difference in the scores reported by a single patient to two different healthcare providers during the same clinic visit. Methods: The current study was a retrospective cohort of 201 consecutive foot and ankle patients treated by a signal surgeon. The patients were asked by the nursing staff to rate their pain intensity using a standard horizontal VAS 0-10, from “no pain” to the “worst possible pain”. At the same office visit the patients were asked by the treating surgeon to rate their pain using the same VAS. Dependent t-tests were calculated to evaluate mean differences in VAS pain reported by each patient to two different healthcare professional. All data were analyzed using STATA v10.1 with an alpha level of p<0.05. Results: The results demonstrate that patients reported higher pain scores to the surgeon within 81% of the encounters, nursing staff 8% and equal 11%. On average the VAS score reported to the surgeon (6.17 ±2.12) was significantly higher higher than that reported to the nursing staff (3.30 ±2.26), respectively. The mean difference between the scores was 2.87 ±2.46 (p=<0.001). Conclusion: The current study demonstrates a clear and significant difference in patient reported pain scores between that given to nursing staff verses the treating surgeon. The cause for the exaggerated pain scores is unclear, but does lead surgeons to consider patients may have a predetermined desire for surgery. The findings of this study may also have implications for comparing patient reported outcome measures prior to surgery to post-surgical outcomes depending on who administers the instrument.

A comparison of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between short and conventional stem hip replacements: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 513-522
Author(s):  
Satish Babu ◽  
Prashant Singh ◽  
Anatole Wiik ◽  
Oliver Shastri ◽  
Khalid Malik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Total Hip Replacements ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Hip Replacements ◽  
Meta Analyses

Introduction: Short stem hip replacements may allow preservation of proximal bone stock and minimise soft tissue disruption, easing future revision surgery. However patient satisfaction with these implants must be determined before widespread use. We aimed to compare patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) between short and conventional stem hip replacements. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines for studies comparing short and conventional stem hip replacements with validated PROMs. Meta-analyses were performed for studies reporting Harris Hip and WOMAC scores. Study bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: 24 studies, incorporating 2593 total hip replacements were included for qualitative analysis. 17 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Of the 7 excluded, 1 study reported the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score and 2 others reported the Oxford Hip score. All three showed no difference between the stems. A meta-analysis of 17 studies reporting Harris hip scores showed no statistically significant difference between short and conventional stems (standard mean difference (SMD) −0.06, 95% CI −0.20—0.07, p = 0.35). 6 studies reported WOMAC scores with higher scores indicating worse outcome. No difference was seen between the two groups (SMD 0.21, 95%CI, −0.01—0.42, p = 0.06). 4 studies reported higher WOMAC scores as better. Once again, a meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the stems (SMD 0.28, 95% CI −0.07—0.63, p = 0.12). Conclusions: Our systematic review showed no difference in PROMs between short and conventional stem total hip replacements. This is in keeping with previous evidence but is a more comprehensive analysis. Short stems may have an important role in younger individuals as they allow preservation of proximal femoral bone, minimal access surgery and are amenable to abnormal anatomy. The current literature is hindered by non-uniform methodologies and outcome assessments across studies. Further, standardised, high quality evidence is required before widespread changes in practice.

scholarly journals A randomised controlled trial assessing the efficacy of co-phenylcaine nasal spray in flexible transnasal pharyngolaryngoscopy

2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (4) ◽  
pp. 313-318 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Javed ◽  
A Parmar ◽  
A Hussain ◽  
D Hajioff ◽  
D Pinder
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Nasal Spray ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Randomised Controlled

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to assess whether using co-phenylcaine nasal spray before flexible transnasal pharyngolaryngoscopy results in reduced pain and discomfort during the procedure. METHODS This was a randomised controlled trial. Eighty-four patients were randomised to receive either co-phenylcaine nasal spray or placebo nasal spray before performing transnasal flexible pharyngolaryngoscopy. Patient reported outcome measures included pain, discomfort, unpleasantness and willingness to repeat the procedure while clinician reported outcome measures comprised ease of examination and quality of view obtained during the procedure. RESULTS There was no statistically significant difference in scores for pain, discomfort, unpleasantness and willingness to repeat the procedure between the co-phenylcaine and placebo groups. On the other hand, ease of examination scores were significantly better for the co-phenylcaine group than for the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS The majority of patients do not find flexible pharyngolaryngoscopy unpleasant or painful with or without topical nasal anaesthesia. However, the spray does appear to help the examiner in completing a satisfactory assessment.

The Use of Postoperative Antibiotics Following Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 194589242198914
Author(s):  
Chloe E. Swords ◽  
Jeremy J. Wong ◽  
Kara N. Stevens ◽  
Alkis J. Psaltis ◽  
Peter J. Wormald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Chronic Rhinosinusitis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Endoscopic Sinus Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Sinus Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported

Background Endoscopic sinus surgery is performed for medically recalcitrant chronic rhinosinusitis. There is no universally accepted strategy regarding post-operative antibiotics despite the high rates of usage worldwide. The aim of this study was to analyse patient-reported and objective outcomes behind antibiotic use following endoscopic sinus surgery. Methods A search of electronic databases was performed. Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational trials were included. The primary outcome was patient reported outcome measures. Secondary outcomes were local infections, endoscopy scores and adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed. Results Of 1045 publications identified, 7 were included in the qualitative synthesis and 5 RCTs were included in meta-analysis. Antibiotic regimens varied between studies in terms of antibiotic selection, timing commenced and duration of use. Meta-analysis suggested no significant difference between placebo and antibiotics in patient reported outcome measures (standardised mean difference (SMD) –0.215, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.637 to 0.207) or endoscopic scores (SMD –2.86, 95% CI –0.846 to 0.273). There was no consistent definition in reporting of infection; therefore, this outcome cannot be comprehensively considered. No severe adverse events were attributable to antibiotics. Conclusions From the studies analysed, there is no level 1 evidence to suggest that antibiotics improved patient outcomes following sinus surgery. However, there was significant heterogeneity in outcome measures and no clear data exists regarding the effects of antibiotics on postoperative infections. The available evidence at present is not enough to make a recommendation in either direction. Further designed larger RCTs are required to investigate these questions in more detail.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adults with Hand Trauma: A Systematic Review

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 145-157
Author(s):  
Daniel Alexander Waltho ◽  
Manraj Nirmal Kaur ◽  
Mary Ellen Gedye ◽  
Achilleas Thoma
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Hand Trauma ◽  
Patient Reported

Impact of Depression on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Lumbar Spine Decompression

Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K. Merrill ◽  
Lukas P. Zebala ◽  
Colleen Peters ◽  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven J. McAnany
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document