Current Trends in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Study of 4 Major Orthopaedic Journals
Current Trends in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Study of 4 Major Orthopaedic Journals
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.arth.2018.06.034
复制
发表时间：
2018-11-01
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Karadsheh, Mark S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Siljander, Matthew P.;McQuivey, Kade S.;Karadsheh, Mark S.
背景资料：更多的重点放在患者报告的结果指标（PROM），但无数的PROM使标准化和跨研究比较困难。随着大数据和大规模全关节登记系统时代的成熟，识别和实施最佳PROMs.Methods将至关重要：对2004年、2009年、2014年和2016年发表在《骨与关节外科杂志-美国卷》、《骨与关节杂志》、《临床骨科及相关研究》和《关节成形术杂志》上的所有摘要进行综述。使用过滤器进行PubMed检索，结果仅限于具有可用摘要的全膝关节、全髋关节和单髁膝关节置换术文章。审查每份摘要，以识别所有PROM。使用Cochran-Armitage检验评价随时间推移的趋势。在非趋势分析中，Pearson卡方检验和单因素方差分析performed.Results：在644项研究中，共使用了42个独特的PROM 1073次。这4种期刊的PROM数量从2004年的97种增加到2016年的228种（P < .0001）。超过一个PROM的文章比例从2004年的20.6%增加到2016年的47.8%（P = .0001）。全膝关节，全髋关节，单髁膝关节置换术研究中使用的最常见的PROM是膝关节学会评分，哈里斯髋关节评分，牛津膝关节评分，foreign.Conclusion：供应商和注册处应考虑出版的结果措施的相对流行率时，选择使用哪些PROM，以更好地促进未来的跨研究比较。(C)2018爱思唯尔公司All rights reserved.
Background: More emphasis is being placed on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), but the myriad of PROMs makes standardization and cross-study comparison difficult. As the era of big data and massive total joint registries matures, it will be critical to identify and implement the best PROMs.Methods: All abstracts published in the years 2004, 2009, 2014, and 2016 in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgeryd-American volume, the Bone and Joint Journal, Clinical Orthopedics and Related Research, and the Journal of Arthroplasty were reviewed. A PubMed search was performed with filters limiting results only to total knee, total hip, and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty articles with available abstracts. Each abstract was reviewed to identify all PROMs. Trends over time were evaluated using the Cochran-Armitage test. In the non-trend analysis, Pearson chi-square tests and one-way analysis of variance were performed.Results: A total of 42 unique PROMs were used 1073 times across 644 studies. The number of PROMs in these 4 journals increased from 97 in 2004 to 228 in 2016 (P < .0001). The proportion of articles with more than one PROM increased from 20.6% in 2004 to 47.8% in 2016 (P = .0001). The most common PROMs used in total knee, total hip, and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty studies were the Knee Society Score, the Harris Hip Score, and the Oxford Knee Score, respectively.Conclusion: Providers and registries should consider the relative prevalence of published outcome measures when selecting which PROMs to use, to better facilitate future cross-study comparison. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.