{"title":"Preoperative predictors of patient-reported outcomes after joint-preserving forefoot surgery for rheumatoid arthritis : a case series.","authors":"Yuki Etani, Takaaki Noguchi, Makoto Hirao, Gensuke Okamura, Atsushi Sugimoto, Seiji Okada, Ken Nakata, Kosuke Ebina","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.108B8.BJJ-2025-1801.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Forefoot deformities are common in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and often impair quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Self-Administered Foot Evaluation Questionnaire (SAFE-Q), are increasingly used to assess surgical outcomes; however, the preoperative conditions needed to achieve favourable postoperative PROMs remain unclear. This study aimed to identify factors associated with postoperative SAFE-Q scores (mean score across five sub-scales, maximum 100) and determined preoperative cutoff values predictive of achieving predefined postoperative SAFE-Q thresholds (≥ 70 or ≥ 90).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this multicentre, retrospective case series, 101 feet in 80 patients (including 21 bilateral cases) with RA who underwent forefoot surgery between July 2015 and July 2023 were analyzed (mean age at surgery 65.8 years (SD 10.7); 79 female patients). Inclusion criteria were symptomatic forefoot deformities with available SAFE-Q data pre-surgery and at ≥ one year post-surgery. Procedures included modified scarf osteotomy and offset shortening osteotomies for the metatarsals. SAFE-Q scores, Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot scores, radiological parameters, and disease activity were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. Multiple regression identified preoperative factors associated with postoperative SAFE-Q scores, and significant variables were further assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses to determine preoperative cutoff values for postoperative SAFE-Q thresholds (≥ 70 and ≥ 90).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Postoperatively, the median SAFE-Q score was 84.8 (IQR 73.0 to 92.3), a significant improvement over the preoperative median score of 48.9 (IQR 34.9 to 67.5; p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that older age and lower preoperative SAFE-Q scores were associated with lower postoperative SAFE-Q scores (β -0.286 (95% CI -0.486 to -0.086) and 0.505 (95% CI 0.319 to 0.691), respectively). ROC analysis identified cutoffs of 54.0 for preoperative SAFE-Q (area under the curve (AUC) 0.644) and 70 years for age (AUC 0.722) when predicting a postoperative score ≥ 90.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Higher preoperative SAFE-Q scores and younger age at surgery were linked to improved postoperative outcomes. Although their predictive accuracy is limited, these thresholds may help estimate postoperative function and support preoperative counselling and shared decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"108-B 8","pages":"1012-1020"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.108B8.BJJ-2025-1801.R1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: Forefoot deformities are common in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and often impair quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Self-Administered Foot Evaluation Questionnaire (SAFE-Q), are increasingly used to assess surgical outcomes; however, the preoperative conditions needed to achieve favourable postoperative PROMs remain unclear. This study aimed to identify factors associated with postoperative SAFE-Q scores (mean score across five sub-scales, maximum 100) and determined preoperative cutoff values predictive of achieving predefined postoperative SAFE-Q thresholds (≥ 70 or ≥ 90).
Methods: In this multicentre, retrospective case series, 101 feet in 80 patients (including 21 bilateral cases) with RA who underwent forefoot surgery between July 2015 and July 2023 were analyzed (mean age at surgery 65.8 years (SD 10.7); 79 female patients). Inclusion criteria were symptomatic forefoot deformities with available SAFE-Q data pre-surgery and at ≥ one year post-surgery. Procedures included modified scarf osteotomy and offset shortening osteotomies for the metatarsals. SAFE-Q scores, Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot scores, radiological parameters, and disease activity were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. Multiple regression identified preoperative factors associated with postoperative SAFE-Q scores, and significant variables were further assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses to determine preoperative cutoff values for postoperative SAFE-Q thresholds (≥ 70 and ≥ 90).
Results: Postoperatively, the median SAFE-Q score was 84.8 (IQR 73.0 to 92.3), a significant improvement over the preoperative median score of 48.9 (IQR 34.9 to 67.5; p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that older age and lower preoperative SAFE-Q scores were associated with lower postoperative SAFE-Q scores (β -0.286 (95% CI -0.486 to -0.086) and 0.505 (95% CI 0.319 to 0.691), respectively). ROC analysis identified cutoffs of 54.0 for preoperative SAFE-Q (area under the curve (AUC) 0.644) and 70 years for age (AUC 0.722) when predicting a postoperative score ≥ 90.
Conclusion: Higher preoperative SAFE-Q scores and younger age at surgery were linked to improved postoperative outcomes. Although their predictive accuracy is limited, these thresholds may help estimate postoperative function and support preoperative counselling and shared decision-making.
期刊介绍:
We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.