Can a single question replace patient-reported outcomes in the follow-up of elbow arthroplasty? A validation study.
Elbow arthroplasty
Follow-up
Patient-reported outcomes
Single assessment numeric evaluation
Subjective elbow score
Journal
Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
ISSN: 1590-9999
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Traumatol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 101090931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Oct 2024
22 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
18
02
2024
accepted:
06
10
2024
medline:
23
10
2024
pubmed:
23
10
2024
entrez:
22
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To assess the results after elbow arthroplasty it is essential to gather patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, the acquisition of PROMs poses a challenge because of potential low literacy, lengthiness and diversity of questionnaires, and questionnaire fatigue. Instead of a questionnaire, patient-reported outcomes can be collected using a single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE), the subjective elbow value (SEV). The aim of this pilot study is to assess the correlation between the SEV and conventionally used patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after elbow arthroplasty. The SEV was added to our follow-up system in 2021, consisting of a scale from 0 to 10 in which the patients are asked to rate the overall functionality of their elbow, 0 corresponds to very poor functionality and 10 to a perfectly functional or healthy elbow. All patients who underwent elbow arthroplasty (total or radial head) and responded to the SEV question were retrospectively identified and included. The correlation between the SEV at the final follow-up and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and between the SEV and the Quick Disbailities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (quickDASH) score was assessed using Pearson's r. In total, 82 patients responded to the SEV question and were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 5 years [interquartile range (IQR) 3-7]. Of these patients, 17 (21%) underwent radial head arthroplasty and 65 (79%) total elbow arthroplasty. The Pearson's r for the correlation between SEV and OES was 0.502 (p < 0.001) and between the SEV and the QuickDASH -0.537 (p < 0.001), which correspond to a moderate correlation. The SEV shows a moderate correlation with conventional PROMs, demonstrating its potential in simplifying the follow-up of elbow arthroplasty, possibly decreasing time, costs, and patients' questionnaire fatigue compared with conventional PROM questionnaires. III.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To assess the results after elbow arthroplasty it is essential to gather patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, the acquisition of PROMs poses a challenge because of potential low literacy, lengthiness and diversity of questionnaires, and questionnaire fatigue. Instead of a questionnaire, patient-reported outcomes can be collected using a single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE), the subjective elbow value (SEV). The aim of this pilot study is to assess the correlation between the SEV and conventionally used patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after elbow arthroplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
The SEV was added to our follow-up system in 2021, consisting of a scale from 0 to 10 in which the patients are asked to rate the overall functionality of their elbow, 0 corresponds to very poor functionality and 10 to a perfectly functional or healthy elbow. All patients who underwent elbow arthroplasty (total or radial head) and responded to the SEV question were retrospectively identified and included. The correlation between the SEV at the final follow-up and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and between the SEV and the Quick Disbailities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (quickDASH) score was assessed using Pearson's r.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 82 patients responded to the SEV question and were included in the study, with a median follow-up of 5 years [interquartile range (IQR) 3-7]. Of these patients, 17 (21%) underwent radial head arthroplasty and 65 (79%) total elbow arthroplasty. The Pearson's r for the correlation between SEV and OES was 0.502 (p < 0.001) and between the SEV and the QuickDASH -0.537 (p < 0.001), which correspond to a moderate correlation.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The SEV shows a moderate correlation with conventional PROMs, demonstrating its potential in simplifying the follow-up of elbow arthroplasty, possibly decreasing time, costs, and patients' questionnaire fatigue compared with conventional PROM questionnaires.
EVIDENCE LEVEL
METHODS
III.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39438360
doi: 10.1186/s10195-024-00790-2
pii: 10.1186/s10195-024-00790-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
49Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Arrigoni P, Cucchi D, D’Ambrosi R, Menon A, Aliprandi A, Randelli P (2017) Arthroscopic R-LCL plication for symptomatic minor instability of the lateral elbow (SMILE). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(7):2264–2270
doi: 10.1007/s00167-017-4531-9
pubmed: 28337591
Baumgarten KM (2022) Can the single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) be used as a stand-alone outcome instrument in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty? J Shoulder Elb Surg 31(9):e426–e435
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.02.036
Bhat MG, Desai A, Patel VR (2022) Functional outcomes and complications following convertible primary total elbow arthroplasty: a single surgeon series. Shoulder Elb 14(3):304–316
Broekman MM, Brinkman N, Swanson D, Ring D, van den Bekerom M, Jawa A (2023) Variations in 1 year trajectories of levels of pain and capability after shoulder arthroplasty are associated with baseline mental health. Clin Orthop Relat Res. https://doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000002821
doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002821
pubmed: 37678387
Claessen FMAP, Mellema JJ, Stoop N, Lubberts B, Ring D, Poolman RW (2016) Influence of priming on patient-reported outcome measures: a randomized controlled trial. Psychosomatics 57(1):47–56
doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2015.09.005
pubmed: 26683347
Engelke J, Vorm Walde M, Schnetzke M, Grützner PA, Nolte PC (2023) High correlation of the subjective elbow value with Mayo elbow performance score and Oxford elbow score in patients with elbow dislocation. JSES Int 7(5):868–871
doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.04.010
pubmed: 37719817
pmcid: 10499643
Ernstbrunner L, Hingsammer A, Imam MA, Sutter R, Brand B, Meyer DC, Wieser K (2018) Long-term results of total elbow arthroplasty in patients with hemophilia. J Shoulder Elb Surg 27(1):126–132
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.09.009
Gathen M, Ploeger MM, Peez C, Weinhold L, Schmid M, Wirtz DC, Burger C, Kabir K (2020) Comparison of the subjective elbow value with the DASH, MEPS und morrey score after olecranon fractures. Z Orthop Unfall 158(2):208–213
doi: 10.1055/a-0946-2649
pubmed: 31533164
Gilbart MK, Gerber C (2007) Comparison of the subjective shoulder value and the constant score. J Shoulder Elb Surg 16(6):717–721
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2007.02.123
Ikemoto RY, Almeida LHO, Motta GGB, Kim ASM, Lial CVN, Claros JJ (2020) Comparative study between scales: subjective elbow value and patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation applied to patients affected by lateral epicondylitis. Rev Bras Ortop 55(5):564–569
doi: 10.1055/s-0039-3402465
Jayakumar P, Teunis T, Vranceanu AM, Moore MG, Williams M, Lamb S, Ring D, Gwilym S (2019) Psychosocial factors affecting variation in patient-reported outcomes after elbow fractures. J Shoulder Elb Surg 28(8):1431–1440
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.04.045
Jonsson E, Wänström J, Björnsson Hallgren H, Adolfsson L (2023) The Oxford elbow score demonstrated good measurement properties when used with a shortened 7 day recall period. JSES Int 7(3):499–505
doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2022.12.023
pubmed: 37266162
pmcid: 10229418
Kerschbaum M, Thiele K, Scheibel M, Gerhardt C (2017) Residual increased valgus stress angulation and posterolateral rotatory translation after simple elbow dislocation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(7):2298–2303
doi: 10.1007/s00167-016-4176-0
pubmed: 27221640
Lanzerath F, Hochberger F, Ott N, Hackl M, Wegmann K, Müller LP, Leschinger T (2023) Anteromedial coronoid facet fractures and associated ligament lesions: a case series. Injury 54(6):1630–1635
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2023.04.026
Nazari G, MacDermid JC, Bobos P, Furtado R (2020) Psychometric properties of the single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) in patients with shoulder conditions. Syst Rev Physiother 109:33–42
doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2020.02.008
Nolte PC, Vorm Walde M, Elrick BP, Grützner PA, Porschke F, Schnetzke M (2023) High return to sport rate and good patient-reported outcomes in recreational athletes following simple elbow dislocations. J Orthop Surg Res. https://doi.org/10.1186/S13018-023-03914-2
doi: 10.1186/S13018-023-03914-2
pubmed: 37355594
pmcid: 10290408
Örgel M, Graulich T, Liodakis E (2022) Single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE)-a promising and valid measuring tool related to patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). Orthopade 51(4):333–336
doi: 10.1007/s00132-021-04190-w
pubmed: 34766185
Patel MS, Kirsch JM, Gutman MJ, McEntee RM, Alberta F, Ramsey ML, Abboud JA, Namdari S (2021) Single assessment numeric evaluation correlates with American shoulder and elbow surgeons score for common elbow pathology: a retrospective cohort study. Am J Sports Med 49(10):2771–2777
doi: 10.1177/03635465211024253
pubmed: 34170754
Paul RW, Gupta R, Zareef U, Lopez R, Erickson BJ, Kelly JD, Huffman GR (2023) Similar return to sport between double cortical button and docking techniques for ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction in baseball players. J Shoulder Elb Surg. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSE.2023.07.045
doi: 10.1016/J.JSE.2023.07.045
Razaeian S, Wiese B, Zhang D, Krettek C, Meller R, Hawi N (2020) Correlation between Oxford elbow score and single assessment numeric evaluation: is one simple question enough? J Shoulder Elb Surg 29(6):1223–1229
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.01.067
Schneeberger AG, Kösters MC, Steens W (2014) Comparison of the subjective elbow value and the Mayo elbow performance score. J Shoulder Elb Surg 23(3):308–312
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.11.018
Sperring CP, Danford NC, Saltzman BM, Constant M, Dantzker NJ, Trofa DP (2021) Patient-reported outcome measurement information system (PROMIS) in orthopaedic trauma research. SICOT-J 7:2021
doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2021035
Thigpen CA, Shanley E, Momaya AM, Kissenberth MJ, Tolan SJ, Tokish JM, Hawkins RJ (2018) Validity and responsiveness of the single alpha-numeric evaluation for shoulder patients. Am J Sports Med. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546518807924
doi: 10.1177/0363546518807924
pubmed: 30419173