Cargando…

How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores

BACKGROUND: Most patients have favorable outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Well-validated methods to predict the risk of poor outcomes have not been developed or implemented. Several patients have annual clinic visits despite well-funcitoning TKA, as a routine practice, to detect...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hightower, Charles D., Hightower, Lisa S., Tatman, Penny J., Morgan, Patrick M., Gioe, Terence, Singh, Jasvinder A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4995795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27553056
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1669-y
_version_ 1782449543829258240
author Hightower, Charles D.
Hightower, Lisa S.
Tatman, Penny J.
Morgan, Patrick M.
Gioe, Terence
Singh, Jasvinder A.
author_facet Hightower, Charles D.
Hightower, Lisa S.
Tatman, Penny J.
Morgan, Patrick M.
Gioe, Terence
Singh, Jasvinder A.
author_sort Hightower, Charles D.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Most patients have favorable outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Well-validated methods to predict the risk of poor outcomes have not been developed or implemented. Several patients have annual clinic visits despite well-funcitoning TKA, as a routine practice, to detect early failure requiring revision surgery. It is not known whether assessment of pain and function can be used as a predictive tool for early failure and revision to guide practice. Our objective was to determine whether pain and function can predict revision after TKA. METHODS: We retrospectively studied data from a large prospectively gathered TKA registry to examine changes in outcome scores for primary TKAs undergoing revision compared to those not requiring revision to determine the factors that are predictive for revision. RESULTS: Of the 1,012 patients, 721 had had a single-sided primary TKA and had American Knee Society (AKS) Scores for three or more visits. 46 patients underwent revision, 23 acutely (fracture, traumatic component failure or acute infection) and 23 for latent causes (late implant loosening, progressive osteolysis, or pain and indolent infection). Mean age was 70 years for the non-revision patients, and 64 years for those revised. Both AKS Clinical and AKS Function Scores for non-revised patients were higher than in revision patients, higher in acute revision compared to latent revision patients. Significant predictors of revision surgery were preoperative, 3- and 15-month postoperative AKS Clinical Scores and 3-month AKS Function Scores. At 15-month post-TKA, a patient with a low calculated probability of revision, 32 % or less, was unlikely to require revision surgery with a negative predictive value of 99 %. CONCLUSION: Time dependent interval evaluation post-TKA with the AKS outcome scores may provide the ability to assign risk of revision to patients at the 15-month follow-up visit. If these findings can be replicated using a patient-reported measure, a virtual follow-up with patient-reported outcomes and X-ray review may be an alternative to clinic visit for patients doing well. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1669-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4995795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49957952016-08-25 How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores Hightower, Charles D. Hightower, Lisa S. Tatman, Penny J. Morgan, Patrick M. Gioe, Terence Singh, Jasvinder A. BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Most patients have favorable outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Well-validated methods to predict the risk of poor outcomes have not been developed or implemented. Several patients have annual clinic visits despite well-funcitoning TKA, as a routine practice, to detect early failure requiring revision surgery. It is not known whether assessment of pain and function can be used as a predictive tool for early failure and revision to guide practice. Our objective was to determine whether pain and function can predict revision after TKA. METHODS: We retrospectively studied data from a large prospectively gathered TKA registry to examine changes in outcome scores for primary TKAs undergoing revision compared to those not requiring revision to determine the factors that are predictive for revision. RESULTS: Of the 1,012 patients, 721 had had a single-sided primary TKA and had American Knee Society (AKS) Scores for three or more visits. 46 patients underwent revision, 23 acutely (fracture, traumatic component failure or acute infection) and 23 for latent causes (late implant loosening, progressive osteolysis, or pain and indolent infection). Mean age was 70 years for the non-revision patients, and 64 years for those revised. Both AKS Clinical and AKS Function Scores for non-revised patients were higher than in revision patients, higher in acute revision compared to latent revision patients. Significant predictors of revision surgery were preoperative, 3- and 15-month postoperative AKS Clinical Scores and 3-month AKS Function Scores. At 15-month post-TKA, a patient with a low calculated probability of revision, 32 % or less, was unlikely to require revision surgery with a negative predictive value of 99 %. CONCLUSION: Time dependent interval evaluation post-TKA with the AKS outcome scores may provide the ability to assign risk of revision to patients at the 15-month follow-up visit. If these findings can be replicated using a patient-reported measure, a virtual follow-up with patient-reported outcomes and X-ray review may be an alternative to clinic visit for patients doing well. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1669-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4995795/ /pubmed/27553056 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1669-y Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hightower, Charles D.
Hightower, Lisa S.
Tatman, Penny J.
Morgan, Patrick M.
Gioe, Terence
Singh, Jasvinder A.
How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
title How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
title_full How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
title_fullStr How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
title_full_unstemmed How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
title_short How often is the office visit needed? Predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
title_sort how often is the office visit needed? predicting total knee arthroplasty revision risk using pain/function scores
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4995795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27553056
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-016-1669-y
work_keys_str_mv AT hightowercharlesd howoftenistheofficevisitneededpredictingtotalkneearthroplastyrevisionriskusingpainfunctionscores
AT hightowerlisas howoftenistheofficevisitneededpredictingtotalkneearthroplastyrevisionriskusingpainfunctionscores
AT tatmanpennyj howoftenistheofficevisitneededpredictingtotalkneearthroplastyrevisionriskusingpainfunctionscores
AT morganpatrickm howoftenistheofficevisitneededpredictingtotalkneearthroplastyrevisionriskusingpainfunctionscores
AT gioeterence howoftenistheofficevisitneededpredictingtotalkneearthroplastyrevisionriskusingpainfunctionscores
AT singhjasvindera howoftenistheofficevisitneededpredictingtotalkneearthroplastyrevisionriskusingpainfunctionscores