定义成功的全膝关节置换术:临床重要变化指标的系统回顾。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Zodina A Beiene, Kira K Tanghe, Cynthia A Kahlenberg, Alexander S McLawhorn, Catherine H MacLean, Elizabeth B Gausden
{"title":"定义成功的全膝关节置换术:临床重要变化指标的系统回顾。","authors":"Zodina A Beiene, Kira K Tanghe, Cynthia A Kahlenberg, Alexander S McLawhorn, Catherine H MacLean, Elizabeth B Gausden","doi":"10.1186/s42836-023-00178-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), the methodology used to evaluate clinically significant postoperative outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is variable. The review aimed to survey studies with identified PROM-based metrics of clinical efficacy and the assessment procedures after TKA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The MEDLINE database was queried from 2008-2020. Inclusion criteria were: full texts, English language, primary TKA with minimum one-year follow-up, use of metrics for assessing clinical outcomes with PROMs, and primary derivations of metrics. The following PROM-based metrics were identified: minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimum detectable change (MDC), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB). Study design, PROM value data, and methods of derivation for metrics were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 18 studies (including 46,173 patients) that met the inclusion criteria. Across these studies, 10 different PROMs were employed, and MCID was derived in 15 studies (83%). The MCID was calculated using anchor-based techniques in nine studies (50%) and distribution techniques in eight studies (44%). PASS values were presented in two studies (11%) and SCB in one study (6%) using an anchor-based method; MDC was derived in four studies (22%) using the distribution method.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is variability in the TKA literature with respect to the definition and derivation of measurements of clinically significant outcomes. Standardization of these values may have implications for optimal case selection and PROM-based quality measurement, ultimately improving patient satisfaction and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10193600/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining a successful total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of metrics of clinically important changes.\",\"authors\":\"Zodina A Beiene, Kira K Tanghe, Cynthia A Kahlenberg, Alexander S McLawhorn, Catherine H MacLean, Elizabeth B Gausden\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s42836-023-00178-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), the methodology used to evaluate clinically significant postoperative outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is variable. The review aimed to survey studies with identified PROM-based metrics of clinical efficacy and the assessment procedures after TKA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The MEDLINE database was queried from 2008-2020. Inclusion criteria were: full texts, English language, primary TKA with minimum one-year follow-up, use of metrics for assessing clinical outcomes with PROMs, and primary derivations of metrics. The following PROM-based metrics were identified: minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimum detectable change (MDC), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB). Study design, PROM value data, and methods of derivation for metrics were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 18 studies (including 46,173 patients) that met the inclusion criteria. Across these studies, 10 different PROMs were employed, and MCID was derived in 15 studies (83%). The MCID was calculated using anchor-based techniques in nine studies (50%) and distribution techniques in eight studies (44%). PASS values were presented in two studies (11%) and SCB in one study (6%) using an anchor-based method; MDC was derived in four studies (22%) using the distribution method.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is variability in the TKA literature with respect to the definition and derivation of measurements of clinically significant outcomes. Standardization of these values may have implications for optimal case selection and PROM-based quality measurement, ultimately improving patient satisfaction and outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10193600/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-023-00178-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-023-00178-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管患者报告结果指标(PROMs)的使用越来越多,但用于评估全膝关节置换术(TKA)后具有临床意义的术后结果的方法却不尽相同。本综述旨在调查已确定的基于PROM的临床疗效指标的研究以及TKA术后的评估程序:方法:检索了 2008-2020 年间的 MEDLINE 数据库。纳入标准为:全文、英文、至少随访一年的初次 TKA、使用 PROMs 评估临床疗效的指标以及指标的主要推导。确定了以下基于 PROM 的指标:最小临床重要性差异 (MCID)、最小可检测变化 (MDC)、患者可接受症状状态 (PASS) 和实质性临床获益 (SCB)。我们记录了研究设计、PROM 值数据以及指标的推导方法:我们确定了符合纳入标准的 18 项研究(包括 46,173 名患者)。这些研究采用了 10 种不同的 PROM,其中 15 项研究(83%)得出了 MCID。有 9 项研究(50%)使用了基于锚的技术计算 MCID,有 8 项研究(44%)使用了分布技术计算 MCID。有 2 项研究(11%)采用了 PASS 值,1 项研究(6%)采用了 SCB,4 项研究(22%)采用了分布法得出了 MDC:结论:TKA 文献中对具有临床意义的结果的测量值的定义和推导存在差异。这些值的标准化可能会对最佳病例选择和基于PROM的质量测量产生影响,最终提高患者满意度和治疗效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Defining a successful total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of metrics of clinically important changes.

Defining a successful total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of metrics of clinically important changes.

Background: Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), the methodology used to evaluate clinically significant postoperative outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is variable. The review aimed to survey studies with identified PROM-based metrics of clinical efficacy and the assessment procedures after TKA.

Methods: The MEDLINE database was queried from 2008-2020. Inclusion criteria were: full texts, English language, primary TKA with minimum one-year follow-up, use of metrics for assessing clinical outcomes with PROMs, and primary derivations of metrics. The following PROM-based metrics were identified: minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimum detectable change (MDC), patient acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB). Study design, PROM value data, and methods of derivation for metrics were recorded.

Results: We identified 18 studies (including 46,173 patients) that met the inclusion criteria. Across these studies, 10 different PROMs were employed, and MCID was derived in 15 studies (83%). The MCID was calculated using anchor-based techniques in nine studies (50%) and distribution techniques in eight studies (44%). PASS values were presented in two studies (11%) and SCB in one study (6%) using an anchor-based method; MDC was derived in four studies (22%) using the distribution method.

Conclusion: There is variability in the TKA literature with respect to the definition and derivation of measurements of clinically significant outcomes. Standardization of these values may have implications for optimal case selection and PROM-based quality measurement, ultimately improving patient satisfaction and outcomes.

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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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