初次全髋关节置换术比翻修全髋关节置换术更快实现最小临床重要差异。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Perry L Lim, Kevin Y Wang, Hany S Bedair, Christopher M Melnic
{"title":"初次全髋关节置换术比翻修全髋关节置换术更快实现最小临床重要差异。","authors":"Perry L Lim, Kevin Y Wang, Hany S Bedair, Christopher M Melnic","doi":"10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the prevalence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a treatment for hip-related conditions, there is limited research directly comparing the patient-reported outcome measures between primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). This study compared the time to achieve minimal clinically important difference (MCID) between primary and rTHA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing 6,671 THAs (6,070 primary and 601 all-cause rTHAs) performed between 2016 and 2022. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using preoperative and postoperative scores of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Physical, PROMIS Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF-10a), and Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS). The time to achieve MCID was assessed using survival curves with and without interval-censoring, and statistical comparisons were performed using log-rank and weighted log-rank tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing the time to achieve MCID without interval-censoring, primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) demonstrated significantly faster median times than rTHA for PROMIS Global Physical (3.3 versus 3.9 months, P < 0.001), PROMIS PF-10a (3.6 versus 6.2 months, P < 0.001), and HOOS-PS (3.1 versus 4.0 months, P < 0.001). Similarly, when using interval-censoring, pTHA continued to achieve MCID significantly faster than rTHA for PROMIS Global Physical (0.23 to 0.24 versus 0.50 to 0.51 months, P < 0.001), PROMIS PF-10a (1.43 to 1.44 versus 3.03 to 3.04 months, P < 0.001), and HOOS-PS (0.87 to 0.87 versus 1.20 to 1.21 months, P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Across all patient-reported outcome measures, pTHA achieved MCID significantly faster than rTHA, irrespective of interval-censoring. These findings underscore the importance of setting realistic postoperative recovery expectations during perioperative patient counseling. Future studies should investigate the factors influencing time to achieve MCID and explore how to enhance rTHA techniques and perioperative management for improved patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>","PeriodicalId":51077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arthroplasty","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Achieves Minimal Clinically Important Difference Faster than Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Perry L Lim, Kevin Y Wang, Hany S Bedair, Christopher M Melnic\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the prevalence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a treatment for hip-related conditions, there is limited research directly comparing the patient-reported outcome measures between primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). This study compared the time to achieve minimal clinically important difference (MCID) between primary and rTHA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing 6,671 THAs (6,070 primary and 601 all-cause rTHAs) performed between 2016 and 2022. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using preoperative and postoperative scores of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Physical, PROMIS Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF-10a), and Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS). The time to achieve MCID was assessed using survival curves with and without interval-censoring, and statistical comparisons were performed using log-rank and weighted log-rank tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing the time to achieve MCID without interval-censoring, primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) demonstrated significantly faster median times than rTHA for PROMIS Global Physical (3.3 versus 3.9 months, P < 0.001), PROMIS PF-10a (3.6 versus 6.2 months, P < 0.001), and HOOS-PS (3.1 versus 4.0 months, P < 0.001). Similarly, when using interval-censoring, pTHA continued to achieve MCID significantly faster than rTHA for PROMIS Global Physical (0.23 to 0.24 versus 0.50 to 0.51 months, P < 0.001), PROMIS PF-10a (1.43 to 1.44 versus 3.03 to 3.04 months, P < 0.001), and HOOS-PS (0.87 to 0.87 versus 1.20 to 1.21 months, P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Across all patient-reported outcome measures, pTHA achieved MCID significantly faster than rTHA, irrespective of interval-censoring. These findings underscore the importance of setting realistic postoperative recovery expectations during perioperative patient counseling. Future studies should investigate the factors influencing time to achieve MCID and explore how to enhance rTHA techniques and perioperative management for improved patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Arthroplasty\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Arthroplasty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"88\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.002\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2024.10.002","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

背景:尽管全髋关节置换术(THA)作为一种治疗髋关节相关疾病的方法非常普遍,但直接比较初次和翻修THA患者报告结果指标(PROMs)的研究却非常有限。本研究比较了初次和翻修THA达到最小临床意义差异(MCID)的时间:我们进行了一项回顾性分析,比较了 2016 年至 2022 年间实施的 6671 例 THA(6070 例初次 THA 和 601 例全因翻修 THA)。使用患者报告结果测量信息系统(PROMIS)全球体能、PROMIS身体功能-10a(PF-10a)和髋关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分-身体功能简表(HOOS-PS)的术前和术后评分对患者报告的结果进行评估。采用带或不带区间校正的生存曲线评估达到 MCID 的时间,并采用对数秩检验和加权对数秩检验进行统计比较:结果:在不进行间隔校正的情况下,比较达到 MCID 的时间,在 PROMIS Global Physical(3.3 个月对 3.9 个月,P < 0.001)、PROMIS PF-10a (3.6 个月对 6.2 个月,P < 0.001)和 HOOS-PS (3.1 个月对 4.0 个月,P < 0.001)方面,初次 THA 的中位时间明显快于翻修 THA。同样,在使用间隔校正时,就PROMIS全球体能(0.23至0.24个月对0.50至0.51个月,P<0.001)、PROMIS PF-10a(1.43至1.44个月对3.03至3.04个月,P<0.001)和HOOS-PS(0.87至0.87个月对1.20至1.21个月,P<0.001)而言,初治THA达到MCID的速度仍然明显快于翻修THA:结论:在所有的PROMs中,初治THA达到MCID的速度明显快于翻修THA,而与时间间隔校正无关。这些发现强调了在围手术期患者咨询中设定切合实际的术后恢复预期的重要性。未来的研究应调查影响达到 MCID 时间的因素,并探讨如何加强翻修 THA 技术和围手术期管理,以改善患者的预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Achieves Minimal Clinically Important Difference Faster than Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Background: Despite the prevalence of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a treatment for hip-related conditions, there is limited research directly comparing the patient-reported outcome measures between primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). This study compared the time to achieve minimal clinically important difference (MCID) between primary and rTHA.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing 6,671 THAs (6,070 primary and 601 all-cause rTHAs) performed between 2016 and 2022. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated using preoperative and postoperative scores of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Global Physical, PROMIS Physical Function Short Form 10a (PF-10a), and Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score - Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS). The time to achieve MCID was assessed using survival curves with and without interval-censoring, and statistical comparisons were performed using log-rank and weighted log-rank tests.

Results: Comparing the time to achieve MCID without interval-censoring, primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) demonstrated significantly faster median times than rTHA for PROMIS Global Physical (3.3 versus 3.9 months, P < 0.001), PROMIS PF-10a (3.6 versus 6.2 months, P < 0.001), and HOOS-PS (3.1 versus 4.0 months, P < 0.001). Similarly, when using interval-censoring, pTHA continued to achieve MCID significantly faster than rTHA for PROMIS Global Physical (0.23 to 0.24 versus 0.50 to 0.51 months, P < 0.001), PROMIS PF-10a (1.43 to 1.44 versus 3.03 to 3.04 months, P < 0.001), and HOOS-PS (0.87 to 0.87 versus 1.20 to 1.21 months, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Across all patient-reported outcome measures, pTHA achieved MCID significantly faster than rTHA, irrespective of interval-censoring. These findings underscore the importance of setting realistic postoperative recovery expectations during perioperative patient counseling. Future studies should investigate the factors influencing time to achieve MCID and explore how to enhance rTHA techniques and perioperative management for improved patient outcomes.

Level of evidence: III.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Arthroplasty
Journal of Arthroplasty 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
734
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Arthroplasty brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement. This peer-reviewed journal publishes original research and manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas relating to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with clinical series and experience, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, metallurgy, biologic response to arthroplasty materials in vivo and in vitro.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信