Cargando…

Total knee arthroplasty: good agreement of clinical severity scores between patients and consultants

BACKGROUND: Nearly 20,000 patients per year in the UK receive total knee arthroplasty (TKA). One of the problems faced by the health services of many developed countries is the length of time patients spend waiting for elective treatment. We therefore report the results of a study in which the Salis...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ebinesan, Ananthan D, Sarai, Bhupinder S, Walley, Gayle, Bridgman, Stephen, Maffulli, Nicola
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1552065/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16879741
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-7-61
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Nearly 20,000 patients per year in the UK receive total knee arthroplasty (TKA). One of the problems faced by the health services of many developed countries is the length of time patients spend waiting for elective treatment. We therefore report the results of a study in which the Salisbury Priority Scoring System (SPSS) was used by both the surgeon and their patients to ascertain whether there were differences between the surgeon generated and patient generated Salisbury Priority Scores. METHODS: The Salisbury Priority Scoring System (SPSS) was used to assign relative priority to patients with knee osteoarthritis as part of a randomised controlled trial comparing the standard medial parapatellar approach versus the sub-vastus approach in TKA. The operating surgeons and each patient completed the SPSS at the same pre-assessment clinic. The SPSS assesses four criteria, namely progression of disease, pain or distress, disability or dependence on others, and loss of usual occupation. Crosstabs and agreement measures (Cohen's kappa) were performed. RESULTS: Overall, the four SPSS criteria showed a kappa value of 0.526, 0.796, 0.813, and 0.820, respectively, showing moderate to very good agreement between the patient and the operating consultant. Male patients showed better agreement than female patients. CONCLUSION: The Salisbury Priority Scoring System is a good means of assessing patients' needs in relation to elective surgery, with high agreement between the patient and the operating surgeon.