Cowan James B, Bedi Asheesh, Carpenter James E, Robbins Christopher B, Gagnier Joel J, Miller Bruce S
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016 Jul;25(7):1100-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.12.009. Epub 2016 Feb 26.
The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) recently released Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) to aid in determining the appropriateness of treatment options. This study compares AAOS AUC recommendations with a cohort of patients treated for known full-thickness rotator cuff tears (RCTs).
Prospectively collected demographic information, treatment allocation, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index scores of 134 patients were retrospectively reviewed. Other criteria required by the AAOS AUC were collected by retrospective record review. Criteria were entered into the AAOS AUC Web-based application to rate the "appropriateness" of treatment options. Ratings were compared with actual treatments and outcomes at 32- or 48-week follow-up.
There was excellent agreement between the AUC recommendations and the actual treatment administered (κ = .945; 95% confidence interval, 0.892-1.000; P <.0001). The administered treatment was "appropriate" for 79% of patients, "may be appropriate" for 19%, and "rarely appropriate" for 2%. Response to previous treatment (P <.0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (P <.0001), and presence of muscle atrophy or fatty infiltration (P = .047) were the only variables that significantly and independently predicted discordance between treatment and the AUC recommendation. In the cases (n = 3) of discordance, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved significantly more (P = .049) than when there was agreement.
Improved clinical outcomes may be achieved for full-thickness RCTs when AAOS AUC recommendations are followed; however, because improved clinical outcomes may also be achieved when the recommendations are not followed, further investigation is needed in a population of patients in whom there is discordance between AAOS AUC recommendations and the treatment administered.
美国骨科医师学会(AAOS)近期发布了《适宜性使用标准》(AUC),以协助确定治疗方案的适宜性。本研究将AAOS的AUC建议与一组已知全层肩袖撕裂(RCT)患者的治疗情况进行比较。
回顾性分析前瞻性收集的134例患者的人口统计学信息、治疗分配情况以及美国肩肘外科医师学会(ASES)肩部评分和西安大略肩袖指数评分。通过回顾性病历审查收集AAOS AUC所需的其他标准。将这些标准输入AAOS AUC基于网络的应用程序,以评估治疗方案的“适宜性”。将评分与32周或48周随访时的实际治疗及结果进行比较。
AUC建议与实际给予的治疗之间存在高度一致性(κ = 0.945;95%置信区间,0.892 - 1.000;P < 0.0001)。给予的治疗对79%的患者“适宜”,对19%的患者“可能适宜”,对2%的患者“很少适宜”。既往治疗反应(P < 0.0001)、美国麻醉医师协会身体状况分级(P < 0.0001)以及肌肉萎缩或脂肪浸润的存在(P = 0.047)是仅有的显著且独立预测治疗与AUC建议不一致的变量。在不一致的病例(n = 3)中,美国肩肘外科医师学会评分的改善显著大于一致的情况(P = 0.049)。
遵循AAOS AUC建议可能实现全层RCT患者更好的临床结局;然而,由于不遵循建议时也可能实现更好的临床结局,因此需要对AAOS AUC建议与所给予治疗不一致的患者群体进行进一步研究。