Patient acceptable symptom state and OMERACT-OARSI set of responder criteria in joint replacement. Identification of cut-off values

Osteoarthritis and Cartilage

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 87-92

  Escobar, A ^a   Gonzalez, M ^a   Quintana, J M ^b   Vrotsou, K ^a   Bilbao, A ^c   Herrera Espineira C ^d   Garcia Perez, L ^e   Aizpuru, F ^f   Sarasqueta, C ^g  

^a HOSPITAL DE BASURTO   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL DE GALDAKAO   (Spain)

^c Barakaldo   (Spain)

^d HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO VIRGEN DE LAS NIEVES   (Spain)

^e CIBER EPIDEMIOLOGÍA Y SALUD PÚBLICA CIBERESP   (Spain)

^f HOSPITAL TXAGORRITXU   (Spain)

^g HOSPITAL DONOSTIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Joint replacement; Outcomes assessment; Response criteria; Satisfaction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; JOINT PROSTHESIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OUTCOME MEASURE IN RHEUMATOLOGY OSTEOARTHRITIS RESEARCH SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT ACCEPTABLE SYMPTOM STATE; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; TREATMENT INDICATION; WESTERN ONTARIO AND MCMASTER UNIVERSITY OSTEOARTHRITIS INDEX;

AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84855858226     PISSN: 10634584     EISSN: 15229653     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.11.007     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Ethgen O., Bruyere O., Richy F., et al. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. JBone Joint Surg Am 2004 May, 86-A(5):963-974.
2. Tubach F., Ravaud P., Beaton D., et al. Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. JRheumatol 2007 May, 34(5):1188-1193.
3. Pham T., van der H.D., Altman R.D., et al. OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2004 May, 12(5):389-399.
4. Tubach F., Ravaud P., Baron G., et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state. Ann Rheum Dis 2005 Jan, 64(1):34-37.
5. Bellamy N., Buchanan W.W., Goldsmith C.H., et al. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. JRheumatol 1988 Dec, 15(12):1833-1840.
6. Singh J., Sloan J.A., Johanson N.A. Challenges with health-related quality of life assessment in arthroplasty patients: problems and solutions. JAm Acad Orthop Surg 2010 Feb, 18(2):72-82.
7. Batlle-Gualda E., Esteve-Vives J., Piera M.C., et al. Tradución y adaptación al español del cuestionario WOMAC específico para artrosis de rodilla y cadera. Rev Esp Reumatol 1999, 26:38-45.
8. Escobar A., Quintana J.M., Bilbao A., et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol 2002 Nov 19, 21:466-471.
9. Kvien T.K., Heiberg T., Hagen K.B. Minimal clinically important improvement/difference (MCII/MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): what do these concepts mean?. Ann Rheum Dis 2007 Nov, 66(Suppl 3):iii40-iii41.
10. Dougados M., Moore A., Yu S., et al. Evaluation of the patient acceptable symptom state in a pooled analysis of two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies evaluating lumiracoxib and celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2007, 9(1):R11.
11. Heiberg T., Kvien T.K., Mowinckel P., et al. Identification of disease activity and health status cut-off points for the symptom state acceptable to patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2008 Jul, 67(7):967-971.
12. Tubach F., Pham T., Skomsvoll J.F., et al. Stability of the patient acceptable symptomatic state over time in outcome criteria in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2006 Dec 15, 55(6):960-963.
13. Tubach F., Dougados M., Falissard B., et al. Feeling good rather than feeling better matters more to patients. Arthritis Rheum 2006 Aug 15, 55(4):526-530.
14. Khanna P.P., Maranian P., Gregory J., et al. The minimally important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for the Raynaud's condition score in patients with Raynaud's phenomenon in a large randomised controlled clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2010 Mar, 69(3):588-591.
15. Arden N.K., Kiran A., Judge A., et al. What is a good patient reported outcome after total hip replacement?. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2011 Feb, 19(2):155-162.
16. Rother M., Lavins B.J., Kneer W., et al. Efficacy and safety of epicutaneous ketoprofen in Transfersome (IDEA-033) versus oral celecoxib and placebo in osteoarthritis of the knee: multicentre randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 2007 Sep, 66(9):1178-1183.
17. Verkleij S.P., Luijsterburg P.A., Koes B.W., et al. Effectiveness of diclofenac versus acetaminophen in primary care patients with knee osteoarthritis: [NTR1485], DIPA-trial: design of a randomized clinical trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010, 11:7.
18. Ruff K.J., Winkler A., Jackson R.W., et al. Eggshell membrane in the treatment of pain and stiffness from osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. Clin Rheumatol 2009 Aug, 28(8):907-914.
19. Van Raaij T.M., Reijman M., Brouwer R.W., et al. Medial knee osteoarthritis treated by insoles or braces: a randomized trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010 Jul, 468(7):1926-1932.
20. Bar-Ziv Y., Beer Y., Ran Y., et al. Atreatment applying a biomechanical device to the feet of patients with knee osteoarthritis results in reduced pain and improved function: a prospective controlled study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010, 11:179.
21. Lin C.W., March L., Crosbie J., et al. Maximum recovery after knee replacement - the MARKER study rationale and protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2009, 10:69.
22. Rissanen P., Aro S., Slatis P., et al. Health and quality of life before and after hip or knee arthroplasty. JArthroplasty 1995 Apr, 10(2):169-175.
23. Wylde V., Dieppe P., Hewlett S., et al. Total knee replacement: is it really an effective procedure for all?. Knee 2007 Dec, 14(6):417-423.
24. Chesworth B.M., Mahomed N.N., Bourne R.B., et al. Willingness to go through surgery again validated the WOMAC clinically important difference from THR/TKR surgery. JClin Epidemiol 2008 Sep, 61(9):907-918.
25. Bourne R.B., Chesworth B., Davis A., et al. Comparing patient outcomes after THA and TKA: is there a difference?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010 Feb, 468(2):542-546.
26. Bourne R.B., Chesworth B.M., Davis A.M., et al. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010 Jan, 468(1):57-63.