Bo J W Notermans, Joris S Teunissen, Lisa Hoogendam, Luitzen H L de Boer, Ruud W Selles, Brigitte E P A van der Heijden
{"title":"\"治疗骨关节炎的近端指间关节置换术：患者满意度、密歇根手部结果问卷评分和再手术的长期随访\"。","authors":"Bo J W Notermans, Joris S Teunissen, Lisa Hoogendam, Luitzen H L de Boer, Ruud W Selles, Brigitte E P A van der Heijden","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previously published research describes short-term outcomes after proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty; however, long-term outcomes are scarce. Therefore, the authors evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after a follow-up of at least 5 years following PIP joint arthroplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors used prospectively gathered data from patients undergoing PIP joint arthroplasty with silicone or surface replacement implants. Time points included preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, and at least 5 years postoperatively. The authors were able to include 74 patients. Primarily, the authors focused on patient satisfaction with the treatment outcome, measured using a validated 5-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included the questions of whether patients would undergo the same surgery again, the assessment of factors associated with satisfaction or dissatisfaction, the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score, and the number of reoperations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean follow-up was 7 ± 1.2 years (range, 5 to 11 years). Patient satisfaction was excellent in 14 patients (19%), good in 17 patients (23%), reasonable in 18 patients (24%), moderate in 10 patients (14%), and poor in 15 patients (20%). Seventy-three percent of patients ( n = 54) would undergo the same procedure again. The authors found no factors associated with satisfaction or dissatisfaction. All Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire scores improved significantly in the first year after surgery and did not deteriorate afterward. Sixteen fingers (16%) required a reoperation, of which 3 (4%) needed a prosthesis replacement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient satisfaction with treatment outcomes 7 years after PIP implant surgery ranges from moderate to good for many patients, with a notable proportion expressing dissatisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes improve primarily within the first year and remain stable at 5 years or more.</p><p><strong>Clinical question/level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic, IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"334e-342e"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis: A Long-Term Follow-Up.\",\"authors\":\"Bo J W Notermans, Joris S Teunissen, Lisa Hoogendam, Luitzen H L de Boer, Ruud W Selles, Brigitte E P A van der Heijden\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011599\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Previously published research describes short-term outcomes after proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty; however, long-term outcomes are scarce. Therefore, the authors evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after a follow-up of at least 5 years following PIP joint arthroplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors used prospectively gathered data from patients undergoing PIP joint arthroplasty with silicone or surface replacement implants. Time points included preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, and at least 5 years postoperatively. The authors were able to include 74 patients. Primarily, the authors focused on patient satisfaction with the treatment outcome, measured using a validated 5-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included the questions of whether patients would undergo the same surgery again, the assessment of factors associated with satisfaction or dissatisfaction, the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score, and the number of reoperations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean follow-up was 7 ± 1.2 years (range, 5 to 11 years). Patient satisfaction was excellent in 14 patients (19%), good in 17 patients (23%), reasonable in 18 patients (24%), moderate in 10 patients (14%), and poor in 15 patients (20%). Seventy-three percent of patients ( n = 54) would undergo the same procedure again. The authors found no factors associated with satisfaction or dissatisfaction. All Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire scores improved significantly in the first year after surgery and did not deteriorate afterward. Sixteen fingers (16%) required a reoperation, of which 3 (4%) needed a prosthesis replacement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient satisfaction with treatment outcomes 7 years after PIP implant surgery ranges from moderate to good for many patients, with a notable proportion expressing dissatisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes improve primarily within the first year and remain stable at 5 years or more.</p><p><strong>Clinical question/level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic, IV.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20128,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plastic and reconstructive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"334e-342e\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plastic and reconstructive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011599\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011599","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis: A Long-Term Follow-Up.
Background: Previously published research describes short-term outcomes after proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty; however, long-term outcomes are scarce. Therefore, the authors evaluated patient-reported outcomes and complications after a follow-up of at least 5 years following PIP joint arthroplasty.
Methods: The authors used prospectively gathered data from patients undergoing PIP joint arthroplasty with silicone or surface replacement implants. Time points included preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, and at least 5 years postoperatively. The authors were able to include 74 patients. Primarily, the authors focused on patient satisfaction with the treatment outcome, measured using a validated 5-point Likert scale. Secondary outcomes included the questions of whether patients would undergo the same surgery again, the assessment of factors associated with satisfaction or dissatisfaction, the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire score, and the number of reoperations.
Results: The mean follow-up was 7 ± 1.2 years (range, 5 to 11 years). Patient satisfaction was excellent in 14 patients (19%), good in 17 patients (23%), reasonable in 18 patients (24%), moderate in 10 patients (14%), and poor in 15 patients (20%). Seventy-three percent of patients ( n = 54) would undergo the same procedure again. The authors found no factors associated with satisfaction or dissatisfaction. All Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire scores improved significantly in the first year after surgery and did not deteriorate afterward. Sixteen fingers (16%) required a reoperation, of which 3 (4%) needed a prosthesis replacement.
Conclusions: Patient satisfaction with treatment outcomes 7 years after PIP implant surgery ranges from moderate to good for many patients, with a notable proportion expressing dissatisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes improve primarily within the first year and remain stable at 5 years or more.
Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, IV.
期刊介绍：
For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
