Singh Jasvinder A, Dowsey Michelle, Choong Peter F
University of Alabama at Birmingham, 510 20th Street S, Faculty Office Tower 805B, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA.
Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 700 19th St S, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Mar 15;18(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1464-x.
A 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.
We 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.
Thirty 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.
Two separate patient stakeholder groups endorsed the OMERACT TJR draft core domain set for TJR trials.
最近制定了一个由患者和外科医生通过德尔菲法得出的用于全关节置换术(TJR)试验的风湿病学结局测量(OMERACT)核心领域草案集。我们的目标是获得患者利益相关者对TJR临床试验核心领域草案集的进一步认可。
我们对两个患者群体进行了调查:(1)OMERACT患者合作伙伴;(2)接受过髋或膝关节TJR的患者。患者收到一封介绍性电子邮件,其中解释了核心领域集,并给出了对OMERACT TJR临床试验核心领域草案集的核心领域(即重要方面)进行评分的说明。评分采用名义量表,1 - 3表示重要性有限的领域,4 - 6表示重要但非关键的领域,7 - 9表示关键领域。我们使用曼 - 惠特尼检验(一种非参数检验)来比较两组之间评分的分布情况。
OMERACT患者合作伙伴组的31名调查参与者和118名膝关节/髋关节TJR患者做出了回应,回应率分别为66%和80%。大多数调查受访者为女性,分别为87%和53%,且年龄在55岁及以上,分别为57%和94%。OMERACT组和膝关节/髋关节TJR患者组对六个核心领域的中位数(四分位间距[IQR])得分分别为:疼痛,8[8, 9]和9[8, 9];功能,9[8, 9]和9[8, 9];患者满意度,8[8, 9]和8[7, 9];翻修手术,7[7, 8]和7[5, 9];不良事件,8[7, 9]和8[6, 9];死亡,9[6, 9]和9[4, 9]。两组在六个核心领域中的任何一个领域的评分均未发现统计学上的显著差异(p≥0.31)。在其他领域中,患者参与度的评分在两组之间没有差异(p = 0.98),但成本的评分有显著差异(p = 0.005)。患者提供了关于核心领域的定性反馈,并且没有对核心领域草案集提出任何修改建议。
两个不同的患者利益相关者群体认可了用于TJR试验的OMERACT TJR核心领域草案集。