Top

Quality of Life Research

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in:

11-11-2022

Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): thresholds for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip and knee scores for patients with total hip and knee replacement

Auteurs: Barbara L. Conner-Spady, Deborah A. Marshall, Eric Bohm, Michael J. Dunbar, Lynda Loucks, Tom W. Noseworthy

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 2/2023

Abstract

Purpose

To define patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip (OHS) and knee (OKS) scores 6 and 12 months after total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement. To compare PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L scored using: (1) the Canadian value set, (2) the crosswalk value set, and (3) the equal weighted Level Sum Score (LSS).

Methods

We mailed questionnaires to consecutive patients following surgeon referral for primary THR or TKR and at 6 and 12 months post-surgery. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the EQ-5D-5L, the OHS, and OKS. We assessed PASS cut-off values for PROMs using percentile and ROC methods, with the Youden Index.

Results

Five hundred forty-two surgical patients (mean age, 64 years, 57% female, 49% THR) completed baseline and 12-month questionnaires. 89% of THR and 81% of TKR patients rated PASS as acceptable at 12 months. PASS cut-off values for THR for the EQ-5D-5L (Canadian) were 0.85 (percentile) and 0.84 (Youden) at 12 months. Cut-off values were similar for the LSS (0.85 and 0.85) and lower for the crosswalk value set (0.74 and 0.73), respectively. EQ-5D-5L cut-off values for TKR were Canadian, 0.77 (Percentile) and 0.78 (Youden), LSS, 0.75 and 0.80, and crosswalk, 0.67 and 0.74, respectively. Cut-off values 6 and 12 months post-surgery ranged from 38 to 39 for the OHS, and 28 to 36 for the OKS (range 0 worst to 48 best).

Conclusion

PASS cut-off values for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford scores varied, not only between methods and timing of assessment, but also by different EQ-5D-5L value sets, which vary between countries. Because of this variation, PASS cut-off values are not necessarily generalizable to other populations of TJR patients. We advise caution in interpreting PROMs when using EQ-5D-5L PASS cut-off values developed in different countries. A standardization of methods is needed before published cut-off values can be used with confidence in other populations.

vorige artikel Mapping the Oxford Shoulder Score onto the EQ-5D utility index

volgende artikel Patient preferences and health state utilities associated with the treatment process of antiretroviral therapy for people living with HIV

Jones, C. A., Voaklander, D. C., Johnston, D. W., & Suarez-Almazor, M. E. (2000). Health related quality of life outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasties in a community based population. Journal of Rheumatology, 27(7), 1745–1752. PubMed

Laupacis, A., Bourne, R., Rorabeck, C., Feeny, D., Wong, C., Tugwell, P., Leslie, K., & Bullas, R. (1993). The effect of elective total hip replacement on health-related quality of life. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 75(11), 1619–1626. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199311000-00006 CrossRef

Rissanen, P., Aro, S., Sintonen, H., Slatis, P., & Paavolainen, P. (1996). Quality of life and functional ability in hip and knee replacements: A prospective study. Quality of Life Research, 5(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00435969 CrossRefPubMed

Ernstsson, O., Janssen, M. F., & Heintz, E. (2020). Collection and use of EQ-5D for follow-up, decision-making, and quality improvement in health care—The case of the Swedish National Quality Registries. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 4(1), 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-020-00231-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Arden, N. K., Kiran, A., Judge, A., Biant, L. C., Javaid, M. K., Murray, D. W., Carr, A. J., Cooper, C., & Field, R. E. (2011). What is a good patient reported outcome after total hip replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 19(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2010.10.004 CrossRefPubMed

Escobar, A., Gonzalez, M., Quintana, J. M., Vrotsou, K., Bilbao, A., Herrera-Espiñeira, C., Garcia-Perez, L., Aizpuru, F., & Sarasqueta, C. (2012). Patient acceptable symptom state and OMERACT-OARSI set of responder criteria in joint replacement. Identification of cut-off values. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 20(2), 87–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2011.11.007 CrossRefPubMed

MacKay, C., Clements, N., Wong, R., & Davis, A. M. (2019). A systematic review of estimates of the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index in patients who underwent total hip and total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 27(10), 1408–1419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2019.05.002 CrossRefPubMed

King, M. T. (2011). A point of minimal important difference (MID): A critique of terminology and methods. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 11(2), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1586/erp.11.9 CrossRef

Revicki, D., Hays, R. D., Cella, D., & Sloan, J. (2008). Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(2), 102–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012 CrossRefPubMed

10.

Hays, R. D., Farivar, S. S., & Liu, H. (2005). Approaches and recommendations for estimating minimally important differences for health-related quality of life measures. COPD, 2(1), 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1081/COPD-200050663 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Conner-Spady, B. L., Marshall, D. A., Bohm, E., Dunbar, M. J., & Noseworthy, T. W. (2018). Comparing the validity and responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L to the Oxford hip and knee scores and SF-12 in osteoarthritis patients 1 year following total joint replacement. Quality of Life Research, 27(5), 1311–1322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1808-5 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Beaton, D., Boers, M., Bombardier, C., Felson, D. T., van der Heijde, D., Wells, G., & Dougados, M. (2007). Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. Journal of Rheumatology, 34(5), 1188–1193. PubMed

13.

Judge, A., Arden, N. K., Kiran, A., Price, A., Javaid, M. K., Beard, D., Murray, D., & Field, R. E. (2012). Interpretation of patient-reported outcomes for hip and knee replacement surgery: Identification of thresholds associated with satisfaction with surgery. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British, 94(3), 412–418. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B3.27425 CrossRef

14.

Maillot, C., Harman, C., Al, Z. M., Sarsam, K., & Riviere, C. (2022). Moderate relationship between function and satisfaction of total hip arthroplasty patients: A cross sectional study. Hip International, 32(1), 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120700020921110 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Veltman, E. S., Moojen, D. J. F., & Poolman, R. W. (2020). Improved patient reported outcomes with functional articulating spacers in two-stage revision of the infected hip. World Journal of Orthopedics, 11(12), 595–605. https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v11.i12.595 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Naal, F. D., Impellizzeri, F. M., Lenze, U., Wellauer, V., von Eisenhart-Rothe, R., & Leunig, M. (2015). Clinical improvement and satisfaction after total joint replacement: A prospective 12-month evaluation on the patients’ perspective. Quality of Life Research, 24(12), 2917–2925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1042-3 CrossRefPubMed

17.

Rolfson, O., Bohm, E., Franklin, P., Lyman, S., Denissen, G., Dawson, J., Dunn, J., Eresian Chenok, K., Dunbar, M., Overgaard, S., Garellick, G., Lübbeke, A., Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries. (2016). Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries Report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries Part II. Recommendations for selection, administration, and analysis. Acta Orthopaedica, 87(Suppl), 19–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2016.1181816 CrossRef

18.

Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Carr, A., & Murray, D. (1996). Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British, 78(2), 185–190. CrossRef

19.

Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Murray, D., & Carr, A. (1998). Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British, 80(1), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.0800063 CrossRef

20.

Murray, D. W., Fitzpatrick, R., Rogers, K., Pandit, H., Beard, D. J., Carr, A. J., & Dawson, J. (2007). The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British, 89(8), 1010–1014. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.89b8.19424 CrossRef

21.

Keurentjes, J. C., Van Tol, F. R., Fiocco, M., So-Osman, C., Onstenk, R., Koopman-Van Gemert, A. W., Pöll, R. G., & Nelissen, R. G. (2014). Patient acceptable symptom states after total hip or knee replacement at mid-term follow-up: Thresholds of the Oxford hip and knee scores. Bone Joint Res, 3(1), 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.31.2000141 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Siljander, M. P., McQuivey, K. S., Fahs, A. M., Galasso, L. A., Serdahely, K. J., & Karadsheh, M. S. (2018). Current trends in patient-reported outcome measures in total joint arthroplasty: A study of 4 major orthopaedic journals. Journal of Arthroplasty, 33(11), 3416–3421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2018.06.034 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Harris, K., Dawson, J., Gibbons, E., Lim, C. R., Beard, D. J., Fitzpatrick, R., & Price, A. J. (2016). Systematic review of measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures used in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty. Patient Related Outcome Measures. https://doi.org/10.2147/PROM.S97774 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Patrick, D. L., & Erickson, P. (1993). Health status and health policy. Oxford University Press.

25.

Dolan, P. (1997). Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Medical Care, 35(11), 1095–1108. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199711000-00002 CrossRefPubMed

26.

Wilson, I., Bohm, E., Lübbeke, A., Lyman, S., Overgaard, S., Rolfson, O., W-Dahl, A., Wilkinson, M., & Dunbar, M. (2019). Orthopaedic registries with patient-reported outcome measures. EFORT Open Reviews, 4(6), 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.4.180080 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Devlin, N., Parkin, D., & Janssen, B. (2020). Methods for analysing and reporting EQ-5D data. Springer International Publishing. CrossRef

28.

Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., Bonsel, G., & Badia, X. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Jenkins, P. J., Clement, N. D., Hamilton, D. F., Gaston, P., Patton, J. T., & Howie, C. R. (2013). Predicting the cost-effectiveness of total hip and knee replacement: A health economic analysis. The Bone and Joint Journal, 95-B(1), 115–121. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B1.29835 CrossRefPubMed

30.

van Hout, B., Janssen, M. F., Feng, Y. S., Kohlmann, T., Busschbach, J., Golicki, D., Lloyd, A., Scalone, L., Kind, P., & Pickard, A. S. (2012). Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: Mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value in Health, 15(5), 708–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008 CrossRefPubMed

31.

Norman, R., Cronin, P., Viney, R., King, M., Street, D., & Ratcliffe, J. (2009). International comparisons in valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis. Value in Health, 12(8), 1194–1200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00581.x CrossRefPubMed

32.

Olsen, J. A., Lamu, A. N., & Cairns, J. (2018). In search of a common currency: A comparison of seven EQ-5D-5L value sets. Health Economics, 27(1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3606 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Gerlinger, C., Bamber, L., Leverkus, F., Schwenke, C., Haberland, C., Schmidt, G., & Endrikat, J. (2019). Comparing the EQ-5D-5L utility index based on value sets of different countries: Impact on the interpretation of clinical study results. BMC Research Notes, 12(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-019-4067-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Buchholz, I., Janssen, M. F., Kohlmann, T., & Feng, Y. S. (2018). A systematic review of studies comparing the measurement properties of the three-level and five-level versions of the EQ-5D. PharmacoEconomics, 36(6), 645–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-018-0642-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Janssen, M. F., Bonsel, G. J., & Luo, N. (2018). Is EQ-5D-5L better than EQ-5D-3L? A head-to-head comparison of descriptive systems and value sets from seven countries. PharmacoEconomics, 36(6), 675–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-018-0623-8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Jin, X., Al Sayah, F., Ohinmaa, A., Marshall, D. A., & Johnson, J. A. (2019). Responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in patients following total hip or knee replacement. Quality of Life Research, 28(9), 2409–2417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02200-1 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Holownia-Voloskova, M., Tarbastaev, A., & Golicki, D. (2021). Population norms of health-related quality of life in Moscow, Russia: The EQ-5D-5L-based survey. Quality of Life Research, 30(3), 831–840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02705-0 CrossRefPubMed

38.

Hinz, A., Kohlmann, T., Stobel-Richter, Y., Zenger, M., & Brahler, E. (2014). The quality of life questionnaire EQ-5D-5L: Psychometric properties and normative values for the general German population. Quality of Life Research, 23(2), 443–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0498-2 CrossRefPubMed

39.

Feng, Y. S., Jiang, R., Kohlmann, T., & Pickard, A. S. (2019). Exploring the internal structure of the eq-5d using non-preference-based methods. Value in Health, 22(5), 527–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2019.02.006 CrossRefPubMed

40.

Parkin, D., Devlin, N., & Feng, Y. (2016). What determines the shape of an EQ-5D index distribution. Medical Decision Making, 36(8), 941–951. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X16645581 CrossRefPubMed

41.

Wilke, C. T., Pickard, A. S., Walton, S. M., Moock, J., Kohlmann, T., & Lee, T. A. (2010). Statistical implications of utility weighted and equally weighted HRQL measures: An empirical study. Health Economics, 19(1), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1467 CrossRefPubMed

42.

Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Martin-Mola, E., Awada, H., Bellamy, N., Bombardier, C., Felson, D. T., Hajjaj-Hassouni, N., Hochberg, M., Logeart, I., Matucci-Cerinic, M., van de Laar, M., van der Heijde, D., & Dougados, M. (2012). Minimum clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state in pain and function in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic back pain, hand osteoarthritis, and hip and knee osteoarthritis: Results from a prospective multinational study. Arthritis Care Research, 64(11), 1699–1707. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.21747 CrossRefPubMed

43.

Maksymowych, W. P., Gooch, K., Dougados, M., Wong, R. L., Chen, N., Kupper, H., & van der Heijde, D. (2010). Thresholds of patient-reported outcomes that define the patient acceptable symptom state in ankylosing spondylitis vary over time and by treatment and patient characteristics. Arthritis Care & Research, 62(6), 826–834. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20131 CrossRef

44.

Grassi, A., Macchiarola, L., Lucidi, G. A., Silvestri, A., Dal Fabbro, G., Marcacci, M., & Zaffagnini, S. (2021). Ten-year survivorship, patient-reported outcome measures, and patient acceptable symptom state after over-the-top hamstring anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a lateral extra-articular reconstruction: Analysis of 267 consecutive cases. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 49(2), 374–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546520986875 CrossRefPubMed

45.

Ingelsrud, L. H., Granan, L. P., Terwee, C. B., Engebretsen, L., & Roos, E. M. (2015). Proportion of patients reporting acceptable symptoms or treatment failure and their associated KOOS values at 6 to 24 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A study from the Norwegian knee ligament registry. American Journal of Sports Medicine, 43(8), 1902–1907. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546515584041 CrossRefPubMed

46.

Maxwell, J., Niu, J., Singh, J. A., Nevitt, M. C., Law, L. F., & Felson, D. (2013). The influence of the contralateral knee prior to knee arthroplasty on post-arthroplasty function: The multicenter osteoarthritis study. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 95(11), 989–993. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.00267 CrossRef

47.

Escobar, A., García Pérez, L., Herrera-Espiñeira, C., Aizpuru, F., Sarasqueta, C., Sáenz, G., de Tejada, M., Quintana, J. M., & Bilbao, A. (2017). Total knee replacement: Are there any baseline factors that have influence in patient reported outcomes. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 23(6), 1232–1239. https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12765 CrossRefPubMed

48.

Connelly, J. W., Galea, V. P., Rojanasopondist, P., Matuszak, S. J., Ingelsrud, L. H., Nielsen, C. S., Bragdon, C. R., Huddleston, J. I., 3rd., Malchau, H., & Troelsen, A. (2019). Patient acceptable symptom state at 1 and 3 years after total knee arthroplasty: Thresholds for the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS). Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 101(11), 995–1003. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.18.00233 CrossRef

49.

Florissi, I., Galea, V., Shin, D., Sauder, N., Colon Iban, Y. E., Ingelsrud, L. H., Troelsen, A., Bragdon, C., & Malchau, H. (2021). External validation of achieving the patient acceptable symptom state for the EuroQol-5 dimension 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 103(2), e5. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.20.00184 CrossRef

50.

Galea, V. P., Ingelsrud, L. H., Florissi, I., Shin, D., Bragdon, C. R., Malchau, H., Gromov, K., & Troelsen, A. (2020). Patient-acceptable symptom state for the Oxford Hip Score and Forgotten Joint Score at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years following total hip arthroplasty: A registry-based study of 597 cases. Acta Orthopaedica, 91(4), 372–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2020.1750877 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Paulsen, A., Roos, E. M., Pedersen, A. B., & Overgaard, S. (2014). Minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients 1 year postoperatively. Acta Orthopaedica, 85(1), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2013.867782 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

52.

Xie, F., Pullenayegum, E., Gaebel, K., Bansback, N., Bryan, S., Ohinmaa, A., Poissant, L., Johnson, J. A., Canadian EQ-5D-5L Valuation Study Group. (2016). A time trade-off-derived value set of the EQ-5D-5L for Canada. Medical Care, 54(1), 98–105. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000447 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Brooks, R. (1996). EuroQol: The current state of play. Health Policy, 37(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6 CrossRefPubMed

54.

Tubach, F., Ravaud, P., Baron, G., Falissard, B., Logeart, I., Bellamy, N., Bombardier, C., Felson, D., Hochberg, M., van der Heijde, D., & Dougados, M. (2005). Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: The patient acceptable symptom state. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 64(1), 34–37. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2004.023028 CrossRefPubMed

55.

Tubach, F., Wells, G. A., Ravaud, P., & Dougados, M. (2005). Minimal clinically important difference, low disease activity state, and patient acceptable symptom state: Methodological issues. Journal of Rheumatology, 32(10), 2025–2029. PubMed

56.

Youden, W. J. (1950). Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer, 3(1), 32–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1%3c32::aid-cncr2820030106%3e3.0.co;2-3 CrossRefPubMed

57.

Ostendorf, M., van Stel, H. F., Buskens, E., Schrijvers, A. J., Marting, L. N., Verbout, A. J., & Dhert, W. J. (2004). Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A comparison of five instruments of health status. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British, 86(6), 801–808. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.86b6.14950 CrossRef

58.

Lin, F. J., Samp, J., Munoz, A., Wong, P. S., & Pickard, A. S. (2014). Evaluating change using patient-reported outcome measures in knee replacement: The complementary nature of the EQ-5D index and VAS scores. EurJHealth Economics, 15(5), 489–496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0489-9 CrossRef

59.

Bryan, S., Goldsmith, L. J., Davis, J. C., Hejazi, S., MacDonald, V., McAllister, P., Randall, E., Suryaprakash, N., Wu, A. D., & Sawatzky, R. (2018). Revisiting patient satisfaction following total knee arthroplasty: A longitudinal observational study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 19(1), 423. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-018-2340-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Cooper, A., Wallman, J. K., & Gulfe, A. (2016). What PASSes for good? Experience-based Swedish and hypothetical British EuroQol 5-dimensions preference sets yield markedly different point estimates and patient acceptable symptom state cut-off values in chronic arthritis patients on TNF blockade. Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology, 45(6), 470–473. https://doi.org/10.3109/03009742.2016.1143965 CrossRefPubMed

61.

Quintana, J. M., Aguirre, U., Barrio, I., Orive, M., Garcia, S., & Escobar, A. (2012). Outcomes after total hip replacement based on patients’ baseline status: What results can be expected. Arthritis Care Research, 64(4), 563–572. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.21570 CrossRefPubMed

62.

Galea, V. P., Florissi, I., Rojanasopondist, P., Connelly, J. W., Ingelsrud, L. H., Bragdon, C., Malchau, H., & Troelsen, A. (2020). The patient acceptable symptom state for the Harris hip score following total hip arthroplasty: Validated thresholds at 3-month, 1-, 3-, 5-, and 7-year follow-up. Journal of Arthroplasty, 35(1), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.08.037 CrossRefPubMed

63.

Palazzo, C., Jourdan, C., Descamps, S., Nizard, R., Hamadouche, M., Anract, P., Boisgard, S., Galvin, M., Ravaud, P., & Poiraudeau, S. (2014). Determinants of satisfaction 1 year after total hip arthroplasty: The role of expectations fulfilment. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-15-53 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Beard, D. J., Harris, K., Dawson, J., Doll, H., Murray, D. W., Carr, A. J., & Price, A. J. (2015). Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 68(1), 73–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.08.009 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Mancuso, C. A., Graziano, S., Briskie, L. M., Peterson, M. G., Pellicci, P. M., Salvati, E. A., & Sculco, T. P. (2008). Randomized trials to modify patients’ preoperative expectations of hip and knee arthroplasties. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Resesearch, 466(2), 424–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-007-0052-z CrossRef

66.

Scott, C. E., Bugler, K. E., Clement, N. D., MacDonald, D., Howie, C. R., & Biant, L. C. (2012). Patient expectations of arthroplasty of the hip and knee. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery British, 94(7), 974–981. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B7.28219 CrossRef

Titel: Patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): thresholds for the EQ-5D-5L and Oxford hip and knee scores for patients with total hip and knee replacement
Auteurs: Barbara L. Conner-Spady
Deborah A. Marshall
Eric Bohm
Michael J. Dunbar
Lynda Loucks
Tom W. Noseworthy
Publicatiedatum: 11-11-2022
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 2/2023
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-022-03287-9

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2023

Health-related quality of life in patients with substance use disorders enrolled to the residential treatment in Sri Lanka: a retrospective cross-sectional study

Effectiveness of a personalized health profile on specificity of self-management goals among people living with HIV in Canada: findings from a blinded pragmatic randomized controlled trial

The wellbeing of women and men with and without disabilities: evidence from cross-sectional national surveys in 27 low- and middle-income countries

Comparison of three health-related quality of life instruments in relation to visual acuity: EQ-5D, 15D, and EUROHIS-QOL8

Qualitative development of the PROMIS Profile v1.0-Familial Chylomicronemia Syndrome (FCS) 28

Differences in quality-of-life scores across injury categories by mental health status among injured U.S. military service members and veterans