Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association · 2024
Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopy With Concomitant Periacetabular Osteotomy Demonstrate Clinically Meaningful Improvement at 2 Years Using the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System and International Hip Outcome Tool 12.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wilson Holly, Harris Joshua, Martin RobRoy, Ellis Thomas, Kollmorgen Robert C
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To report the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) values using the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT-12) in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy (HA) with concomitant periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), HA + PAO for acetabular dysplasia, and intra-articular pathology with a minimum 2-year follow-up.
METHODS: Data from patients who underwent HA + PAO were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients who had a diagnosis of hip dysplasia or hip instability and had a minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome measure follow-up. Data were collected electronically preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Outcome measures analyzed were the iHOT-12 and PROMIS computer adaptive tests: Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Global Physical Health (GPH). MCID and SCB were calculated for these measures.
RESULTS: In total, 106 patients were included in the study with an average age of 23.5 ± 6.6 years, an average body mass index of 24.3, and the majority being female (94%). The values for MCID were calculated to be 40.9, 40.7, 60.2, and 43.5, and the percentage achieving MCID at 2 years was 82.6%, 82.9%, 79.6%, and 80.1% for the iHOT-12, PROMIS-PF, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-GPH respectively. The 1-year and 2-year SCB scores for ≥80% satisfaction and percent achieving were as follows, respectively: iHOT-12, 71.8 (60.3%), 61.9 (65.1%); PROMIS-PF, 47.1 (64.2%), 47.2 (71.7%); PROMIS-PI, 50.6 (48.1%), 52.3 (49.1%); and PROMIS-GPH, 49.3 (54.7%), 49.3 (55.7%). The 1-year and 2-year SCB scores for 100% satisfaction and percent achieving were as follows, respectively: iHOT-12, 80.2 (44.3%), 81.3 (47.2%); PROMIS-PF, 50.7 (46.2%), 50.3 (56.6%); PROMIS-PI, 52.4 (34.9%), 52.4 (49.1%); and PROMIS-GPH, 52.5 (36.8%), 49.3 (55.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports values for MCID and SCB for PROMIS and iHOT-12 at a 2-year follow-up in patients undergoing HA + PAO for hip dysplasia or instability. The percentage of patients achieving MCID ranged from 79.6% to 82.9% at the 2-year follow-up. In addition, the percentage of patients achieving SCB at the 2-year follow-up for ≥80% satisfaction ranged from 49.1% to 71.2%, and the percentage for 100% satisfaction ranged from 49.1% to 56.6%.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.
METHODS: Data from patients who underwent HA + PAO were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients who had a diagnosis of hip dysplasia or hip instability and had a minimum 2-year patient-reported outcome measure follow-up. Data were collected electronically preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Outcome measures analyzed were the iHOT-12 and PROMIS computer adaptive tests: Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Global Physical Health (GPH). MCID and SCB were calculated for these measures.
RESULTS: In total, 106 patients were included in the study with an average age of 23.5 ± 6.6 years, an average body mass index of 24.3, and the majority being female (94%). The values for MCID were calculated to be 40.9, 40.7, 60.2, and 43.5, and the percentage achieving MCID at 2 years was 82.6%, 82.9%, 79.6%, and 80.1% for the iHOT-12, PROMIS-PF, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-GPH respectively. The 1-year and 2-year SCB scores for ≥80% satisfaction and percent achieving were as follows, respectively: iHOT-12, 71.8 (60.3%), 61.9 (65.1%); PROMIS-PF, 47.1 (64.2%), 47.2 (71.7%); PROMIS-PI, 50.6 (48.1%), 52.3 (49.1%); and PROMIS-GPH, 49.3 (54.7%), 49.3 (55.7%). The 1-year and 2-year SCB scores for 100% satisfaction and percent achieving were as follows, respectively: iHOT-12, 80.2 (44.3%), 81.3 (47.2%); PROMIS-PF, 50.7 (46.2%), 50.3 (56.6%); PROMIS-PI, 52.4 (34.9%), 52.4 (49.1%); and PROMIS-GPH, 52.5 (36.8%), 49.3 (55.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: This study reports values for MCID and SCB for PROMIS and iHOT-12 at a 2-year follow-up in patients undergoing HA + PAO for hip dysplasia or instability. The percentage of patients achieving MCID ranged from 79.6% to 82.9% at the 2-year follow-up. In addition, the percentage of patients achieving SCB at the 2-year follow-up for ≥80% satisfaction ranged from 49.1% to 71.2%, and the percentage for 100% satisfaction ranged from 49.1% to 56.6%.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.