Stratification of the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state after total shoulder arthroplasty by implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex

被引:1
|
作者
Simovitch, Ryan W. [1 ]
Elwell, Josie [2 ]
Colasanti, Christopher A. [3 ]
Hao, Kevin A. [4 ]
Friedman, Richard J. [5 ]
Flurin, Pierre-Henri [6 ]
Wright, Thomas W. [4 ]
Schoch, Bradley S. [7 ]
Roche, Christopher P. [2 ]
Zuckerman, Joseph D. [3 ]
机构
[1] Hosp Special Surg, W Palm Beach, FL USA
[2] Exactech Inc, Gainesville, FL USA
[3] NYU, Langone Orthoped Hosp, New York, NY USA
[4] Univ Florida, Dept Orthopaed Surg & Sports Med, Gainesville, FL USA
[5] Med Univ South Carolina, Charleston, SC USA
[6] Clin Sport Bordeaux Merignac, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Merignac, France
[7] Mayo Clin, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Jacksonville, FL USA
关键词
MCID; SCB; PASS; RTSA; reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; ATSA; anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty; QUANTIFYING SUCCESS; OUTCOMES; OSTEOARTHRITIS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jse.2024.01.040
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Clinical significance, as opposed to statistical significance, has increasingly been utilized to evaluate outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purpose of this study was to identify thresholds of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for TSA outcome metrics and determine if these thresholds are influenced by prosthesis type (anatomic or reverse TSA), sex, or preoperative diagnosis. Methods: A prospectively collected international multicenter database inclusive of 38 surgeons was queried for patients receiving a primary aTSA or rTSA between 2003 and 2021. Prospectively, outcome metrics including ASES, shoulder function score (SFS), SST, UCLA, Constant, VAS Pain, shoulder arthroplasty smart (SAS) score, forward flexion, abduction, external rotation, and internal rotation was recorded preoperatively and at each follow-up. A patient satisfaction question was administered at each follow-up. Anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as defined previously overall and according to implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. The percentage of patients achieving thresholds was also quantified. Results: A total of 5851 total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs) including aTSA (n = 2236) and rTSA (n = 3615) were included in the study cohort. The following were identified as MCID thresholds for the overall (aTSA thorn rTSA irrespective of diagnosis or sex) cohort: VAS Pain (-1.5), SFS (1.2), SST (2.1), Constant (7.2), ASES (13.9), UCLA (8.2), SPADI (-21.5), and SAS (7.3), Abduction (13 degrees), Forward elevation (16 degrees), External rotation (4 degrees), Internal rotation score (0.2). SCB thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (-3.3), SFS (2.9), SST 3.8), Constant (18.9), ASES (33.1), UCLA (12.3), SPADI (-44.7), and SAS (18.2), Abduction (30 degrees), Forward elevation (31 degrees), External rotation (12 degrees), Internal rotation score (0.9). PASS thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (0.8), SFS (7.3), SST (9.2), Constant (64.2), ASES (79.5), UCLA (29.5), SPADI (24.7), and SAS (72.5), Abduction (104 degrees), Forward elevation (130 degrees), External rotation (30 degrees), Internal rotation score (3.2). MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds varied depending on preoperative diagnosis and sex. Conclusion: MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds vary depending on implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. A comprehensive understanding of these differences as well as identification of clinically relevant thresholds for legacy and novel metrics is essential to assist surgeons in evaluating their patient's outcomes, interpreting the literature, and counseling their patients preoperatively regarding expectations for improvement. Given that PASS thresholds are fragile and vary greatly depending on cohort variability, caution should be exercised in conflating them across different studies. (c) 2024 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:e492 / e506
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Preoperative patient- reported outcome measures predict minimal clinically important difference and patient- acceptable symptomatic state following arthroscopic Bankart repair
    Long, Y.
    Zheng, Z-z.
    Li, X-h.
    Cui, D-d.
    Deng, X-h.
    Guo, J.
    Yang, R.
    BONE & JOINT JOURNAL, 2024, 106B (10): : 1118 - 1124
  • [32] The Value of Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient- Acceptable Symptomatic State for Commonly Used Patient-Reported Outcomes in Recurrent Patellar Instability Patients After Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction and Tibial Tubercle Transfer
    Qiao, Yi
    Wu, Chenliang
    Wu, Xiulin
    Li, Ziyun
    Chen, Jiebo
    Xu, Caiqi
    Zhao, Song
    Zhao, Jinzhong
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2024, 40 (01): : 115 - 123
  • [33] Editorial Commentary: The Alphabet Soup of Understanding Clinical Shoulder Research: MCID (Minimal Clinically Important Difference), PASS (Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State), SCB (Substantial Clinical Bene fi t), and Now ... MOI (Maximal Outcome Improvement) ...
    Tashjian, Robert
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2020, 36 (07): : 1811 - 1812
  • [34] Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit Values for a Pain Visual Analog Scale After Hip Arthroscopy
    Martin, RobRoy L.
    Kivlan, Benjamin R.
    Christoforetti, John J.
    Wolff, Andrew B.
    Nho, Shane J.
    Salvo, John P., Jr.
    Ellis, Thomas J.
    Van Thiel, Geoff
    Matsuda, Dean
    Carreira, Dominic S.
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2019, 35 (07): : 2064 - 2069
  • [35] Time Required to Achieve Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Substantial Clinical Benefit After Arthroscopic Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement
    Nwachukwu, Benedict U.
    Chang, Brenda
    Adjei, Joshua
    Schairer, William W.
    Ranawat, Anil S.
    Kelly, Bryan T.
    Nawabi, Danyal H.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2018, 46 (11): : 2601 - 2606
  • [36] The variability in minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptomatic state values did not have an impact on treatment effect estimates
    Tubach, Florence
    Giraudeau, Bruno
    Ravaud, Philippe
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 62 (07) : 725 - 728
  • [37] Quantifying success after first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal and substantial clinically important percentage of maximal possible improvement
    Hao, Kevin A.
    Hones, Keegan M.
    O'Keefe, Daniel S.
    Saengchote, Supreeya A.
    Turnbull, Lacie M.
    Wright, Jonathan O.
    Wright, Thomas W.
    Farmer, Kevin W.
    Struk, Aimee M.
    Simovitch, Ryan W.
    Schoch, Bradley S.
    King, Joseph J.
    JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2024, 33 (03) : 593 - 603
  • [38] Effect of Patient Characteristics on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair
    Pasqualini, Ignacio
    Tanoira, Ignacio
    Hurley, Eoghan T.
    Ranalletta, Maximiliano
    Rossi, Luciano Andres
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2024, 52 (01): : 174 - 180
  • [39] Defining Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State After Isolated Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair
    Okoroha, Kelechi R.
    Beck, Edward C.
    Nwachukwu, Benedict U.
    Kunze, Kyle N.
    Nho, Shane J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2019, 47 (13): : 3141 - 3147
  • [40] The Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State for Commonly Used Patient-Reported Outcomes After Knee Cartilage Repair
    Chahal, Jaskarndip
    Lansdown, Drew A.
    Davey, Annabelle
    Davis, Aileen M.
    Cole, Brian J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2021, 49 (01): : 193 - 199