Search

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measure progression and quality of care. While legacy PROs such as the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) survey are well-validated, a lengthy PRO creates a time burden on patients, decreasing adherence. In recent years, PROs such as the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function and Pain Interference surveys were developed as computer adaptive tests, reducing time to completion. Previous studies have examined correlation between legacy PROs and PROMIS; however, no studies have developed effective prediction models utilizing PROMIS to create an IKDC index. While the IKDC is the standard knee PRO, computer adaptive PROs offer numerous practical advantages. Purpose: To develop a nonlinear predictive model utilizing PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference to estimate IKDC survey scores and examine algorithm sensitivity and validity. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The MOTION (Military Orthopaedics Tracking Injuries and Outcomes Network) database is a prospectively collected repository of PROs and intraoperative variables. Patients undergoing knee surgery completed the IKDC and PROMIS surveys at varying time points. Nonlinear multivariable predictive models using Gaussian and beta distributions were created to establish an IKDC index score, which was then validated using leave-one-out techniques and minimal clinically important difference analysis. Results: A total of 1011 patients completed the IKDC and PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference, providing 1618 complete observations. The algorithms for the Gaussian and beta distribution were validated to predict the IKDC (Pearson = 0.84-0.86; R 2 = 0.71-0.74; root mean square error = 9.3-10.0). Conclusion: The publicly available predictive models can approximate the IKDC score. The results can be used to compare PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference against historical IKDC scores by creating an IKDC index score. Serial use of the IKDC index allows for a lower minimal clinically important difference than the conventional IKDC. PROMIS can be substituted to reduce patient burden, increase completion rates, and produce orthopaedic-specific survey analogs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The preferred patient-reported outcome measure for the assessment of shoulder conditions continues to evolve. Previous studies correlating the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive tests (CATs) to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score have focused on a singular domain (pain or physical function) but have not evaluated the combined domains of pain and physical function that compose the ASES score. Additionally, previous studies have not provided a multivariable prediction tool to convert PROMIS scores to more familiar legacy scores. Purpose: To establish a valid predictive model of ASES scores using a nonlinear combination of PROMIS domains for physical function and pain. Study Design: Cohort study (Diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The Military Orthopaedics Tracking Injuries and Outcomes Network (MOTION) database is a prospectively collected repository of patient-reported outcomes and intraoperative variables. Patients in MOTION research who underwent shoulder surgery and completed the ASES, PROMIS Physical Function, and PROMIS Pain Interference at varying time points were included in the present analysis. Nonlinear multivariable predictive models were created to establish an ASES index score and then validated using "leave 1 out" techniques and minimal clinically important difference /substantial clinical benefit (MCID/SCB) analysis. Results: A total of 909 patients completed the ASES, PROMIS Physical Function, and PROMIS Pain Interference at presurgery, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery, providing 1502 complete observations. The PROMIS CAT predictive model was strongly validated to predict the ASES (Pearson coefficient = 0.76-0.78; R 2 = 0.57-0.62; root mean square error = 13.3-14.1). The MCID/SCB for the ASES was 21.7, and the best ASES index MCID/SCB was 19.4, suggesting that the derived ASES index is effective and can reliably re-create ASES scores. Conclusion: The PROMIS CAT predictive models are able to approximate the ASES score within 13 to 14 points, which is 7 points more accurate than the ASES MCID/SCB derived from the sample. Our ASES index algorithm, which is freely available online (https://osf.io/ctmnd/), has a lower MCID/SCB than the ASES itself. This algorithm can be used to decrease patient survey burden by 11 questions and provide a reliable ASES analog to clinicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lisfranc injuries are challenging to treat and may have a detrimental effect on athletic performance. Purpose: (1) Determine the epidemiological characteristics of Lisfranc injuries at the annual National Football League (NFL) Scouting Combine, (2) define player positions at risk for these injuries, and (3) evaluate the impact that these injuries and radiographic findings have on NFL draft position and performance. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All players who sustained a Lisfranc injury prior to Combine evaluation between 2009 and 2015 were evaluated. The epidemiological characteristics, player positions affected, treatment methods, and number of missed collegiate games were recorded. Radiographic outcomes were analyzed via Combine radiograph findings, while NFL performance outcomes were assessed for all Lisfranc injuries (2009-2013) compared with matched controls in the first 2 years of play. Results: A total of 41 of 2162 (1.8%) Combine participants were identified with Lisfranc injuries, of whom 26 of 41 (63.4%) were managed operatively. Players who underwent surgery were more likely to go undrafted compared with players managed nonoperatively (38.5% vs 13.3%, operative vs nonoperative management, respectively; P = .04) and featured a worse NFL draft pick position (155.6 vs 109; P = .03). Lisfranc-injured players when compared with controls were noted to have worse outcomes in terms of NFL draft position (142 vs 111.3, Lisfranc-injured players vs controls, respectively; P = .04), NFL career length 2 years or longer (62.5% vs 69.6%; P = .23), and number of games played (16.9 vs 23.3; P = .001) and started (6.8 vs 10.5; P = .08) within the first 2 years of their NFL career. Radiographs demonstrated that 17 of 41 (41.5%) athletes had residual Lisfranc joint displacement greater than 2 mm compared with the contralateral foot. Lisfranc-injured athletes with greater than 2 mm residual displacement, when compared with matched controls, had worse draft position (156.9 vs 111.2 for Lisfranc-injured players vs controls, respectively; P = .009) and fewer games played (14.4 vs 23.3; P = .001) and started (3.1 vs 10.5; P = .03). Moreover, athletes with greater than 2 mm residual displacement featured worse outcomes across all assessed NFL variables versus athletes with residual displacement of 2 mm or less. Conclusion: Lisfranc injuries identified at the NFL Combine have an adverse effect on an NFL athlete’s draft status, draft position, and overall play during initial NFL seasons. In particular, residual displacement of the Lisfranc joint has a detrimental effect on the first 2 seasons of NFL play and may lead to long-lasting negative effects on the athlete’s career. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Static anterior tibial subluxation after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury highlights the abnormal relationship between the tibia and femur in patients with ACL insufficiency, although causal factors including injuries to secondary stabilizers or the time from injury to reconstruction have not been examined. Purpose: To determine static relationships between the tibia and femur in patients with various states of ACL deficiency and to identify factors associated with anterior tibial subluxation. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients treated for ACL injuries were identified from an institutional registry and assigned to 1 of 4 cohorts: intact ACL, acute ACL disruption, chronic ACL disruption, and failed ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Anterior tibial subluxation of the medial and lateral compartments relative to the femoral condyles were measured on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and an MRI evaluation for meniscal tears, chondral defects, and injuries to the anterolateral ligament (ALL) was performed. Results: One hundred eighty-six ACL-insufficient knees met inclusion criteria, with 26 patients without an ACL injury utilized as a control group. In the lateral compartment, the mean anterior tibial subluxation measured 0.78 mm for the control group (n = 26), 2.81 mm for the acute ACL injury group (n = 74), 3.64 mm for the chronic ACL injury group (n = 40), and 4.91 mm for the failed ACLR group (n = 72). In the failed ACLR group, 37.5% of patients demonstrated lateral compartment anterior subluxation ≥6 mm, and 11.1% of this group had anterior subluxation of the lateral compartment ≥10 mm. Multivariate regression revealed that the presence of both medial and lateral chondral defects was associated with a mean 1.09-mm increase in subluxation of the medial compartment (P = .013). The combination of medial and lateral meniscal tears was an independent predictor of increased lateral tibia subluxation by 1.611 mm (P = .0022). Additionally, across all knee states, an injury to the ALL was associated with increased anterior tibial subluxation in both the medial compartment (P = .0438) and lateral compartment (P = .0046). In 29.4% of knees with ALL injuries, lateral tibial subluxation was ≥6 mm, but with multivariate regression analysis, an ALL injury was not an independent predictor of anterior subluxation of the lateral compartment. Conclusion: Knees with failed ACLR are associated with more anterior tibial subluxation than those with primary ACL deficiency. Using previously reported thresholds of 6 to 10 mm of lateral compartment subluxation for a positive pivot shift, between 11.1% and 37.5% of knees with failed ACLR may be in a “resting pivoted position.” In primary ACL-deficient knees, anterior tibial subluxation is associated with chondral injuries and meniscal tears but not injury chronicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]