Patient Endorsement of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Total Joint Replacement (TJR) clinical trial draft core domain set

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Research Article

Michelle Dowsey¹  Peter F. Choong¹  Jasvinder A. Singh² 

[1] Department of Surgery, University of Melbourne, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne, Australia;University of Alabama at Birmingham, 510 20th Street S, Faculty Office Tower 805B, 35294, Birmingham, AL, USA;Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 700 19th St S, 35233, Birmingham, AL, USA;

关键词: Core Domain;    Total Joint Replacement;    Additional Domain;    Critical Domain;    Arthroplasty Registry;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12891-017-1464-x

 received in 2016-12-09, accepted in 2017-02-28,  发布年份 2017

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundA patient- and surgeon-Delphi-derived Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) draft core domain set for total joint arthroplasty (TJR) trials was recently developed. Our objective was to obtain further patient stakeholder endorsement of draft core domain set for TJR clinical trials.MethodsWe surveyed two patient groups: (1) OMERACT patient partners; and (2) patients who had undergone hip or knee TJR. Patients received an introductory email with explanations about the core domain set and instructions to rate the core domains, i.e., important aspects, of OMERACT TJR clinical trial draft core domain set. Rating was on a nominal scale, where 1–3 indicated a domain of limited importance, 4–6 an important, but not critical domain, and 7–9 a critical domain. We used Mann–Whitney test (a non-parametric test) to compare the distribution of ratings between the two groups.ResultsThirty one survey participants from the OMERACT patient partner group and 118 knee/hip TJR patients responded with response rates of 66 and 80%, respectively. Majority of the survey respondents were female, 87 vs. 53%, and were 55 years or older, 57 vs. 94%. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) scores for six core domains by OMERACT and knee/hip TJR patient groups were, respectively: pain, 8 [8, 9] and 9 [8, 9]; function, 9 [8, 9] and 9 [8, 9]; patient satisfaction, 8 [8, 9] and 8 [7, 9]; revision surgery, 7 [7, 8] and 7 [5, 9]; adverse events, 8 [7, 9] and 8 [6, 9]; and death, 9 [6, 9] and 9 [4, 9]. No statistically significant differences in rating were noted for any of the six core domains between the two groups (p ≥ 0.31). Among the additional domains, ratings for patient participation did not differ by group (p = 0.98), but ratings for cost were significantly different (p = 0.005). Patients provided qualitative feedback regarding core domains, and did not propose any modifications to the draft core domain set.ConclusionsTwo separate patient stakeholder groups endorsed the OMERACT TJR draft core domain set for TJR trials.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017