Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Achieving Satisfaction with Patient-Reported Outcomes: PROMS

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rapid Recovery in Total Joint Arthroplasty

Abstract

The term “outpatient total joints” has been used with increasing frequency in the last few years. As healthcare institutions and insurance companies attempt to control reimbursement, surgery centers and hospitals are incentivized for patients to receive outpatient total joint arthroplasty. This has resulted in developments in treatment protocols aimed at minimizing complications, infection, delay, and cost, while maximizing efficiency, outcomes, and patient satisfaction. As surgery centers across the nation have emphasized rapid recovery after surgery, procedure-driven checklists are utilized to streamline pre- and postoperative protocols. This certainly puts pressure on healthcare providers to place patient satisfaction at the forefront of institutional developments and improvements. Patient satisfaction is a qualitative metric and is measured through various questionnaires and forms for objective or quantitative data. Patient-reported outcome measures are tools that the healthcare provider can use to assess patient satisfaction, barriers to satisfaction, and ways to improve overall fulfillment after total joint arthroplasty. This chapter discusses the various modalities of patient-reported outcome measures and how they can be used to improve and establish patient satisfaction in outpatient total joint arthroplasty.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hung M, Saltzman CL, Greene T, Voss MW, Bounsanga J, Gu Y, Anderson MB, Peters CL, Gililland J, Pelt CE. Evaluating instrument responsiveness in joint function: the HOOS JR, the KOOS JR, and the PROMIS PF CAT. J Orthop Res. 2018;36:1178–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Franklin PD, Lewallen D, Bozic K, Hallstrom B, Jiranek W, Ayers DC. Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in U.S. total joint replacement registries: rationale, status, and plans. JBJS. 2014;96(Suppl 1(E)):104–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KDJ. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:57–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Williams O, Fitzpatrick R, Hajat S, Reeves BC, Stimpson A, Morris RW, Murray DW, Rigge M, Gregg PJ. Mortality, morbidity and 1-year outcomes of primary elective total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2002;17(2):165–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wylde V, Blom AW, Whitehouse SL, Taylor AH, Pattison GT, Bannister GC. Patient-reported outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty: comparison of midterm results. J Arthroplast. 2009;24(2):210–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Varacallo M, Chakravarty R, Denehy K, Star A. Joint perception and patient perceived satisfaction after total hip and knee arthroplasty in the American population. J Orthop. 2018;15(2):495–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Baker PN, van der Meulen JH, Lewsey J, Gregg PJ. The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89(7):893–900.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ramkumar PN, Harris JD, Noble PC. Patient reported outcome measures after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Bone Jt Res. 2015;4(17):120–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Scott CE, Bugler KE, Clement ND, MacDonald D, Howie CR, Biant LC. Patient expectations of arthroplasty of the hip and knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:974–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Anakwe RE, Jenkins PJ, Moran M. Predicting dissatisfaction after total hip arthroplasty: a study of 850 patients. J Arthroplast. 2011;26(2):209–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dunbar MJ, Richardson G, Robertsson O. I can’t get no satisfaction after my total knee replacement: rhymes and reasons. Bone Jt J. 2013;95-B(11 Suppl A):148–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Clement ND, Bardgett M, Weir D, Holland J, Gerrand C, Deehan DJ. Three groups of dissatisfied patients exist after total knee arthroplasty: early, persistent, and late. Bone Jt J. 2018;100-B(2):161–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Judge A, Arden NK, Cooper C, Kassim Javaid M, Carr AJ, Field RE, Dieppe PA. Predictors of outcomes of total knee replacement surgery. Rheumatology. 2012;51:1804–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Van Onsem S, Van Der Straeten C, Arnout N, Deprez P, Van Damme G, Victor J. A mew prediction model for patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2016;31(12):2660–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Parvizi J, Nunley RM, Berend KR, Lombardi AV, Ruh EL, Clohisy JC, Hamilton WG, Della Valle CJ, Barrack RL. High level of residual symptoms in young patients after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:133–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Mallory TH. Rapid recovery protocol for peri-operative care of total hip and total knee arthroplasty patients. Surg Techol Int. 2004;13:239–47.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Horlocker TT, Kopp SL, Pagano MW, Hebl JR. Analgesia for total hip and knee arthroplasty: a multimodal pathway featuring peripheral nerve block. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2006;14:126–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mears DC, Mears SC, Chelly JE, Dai F, Vulakovich KL. THA with a minimally invasive technique, multi-modal anesthesia, and home rehabilitation: factors associated with early discharge? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(6):1412–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Ghomrawi HM, Franco Ferrando N, Mandl LA, Do H, Noor N, Gonzalez Della Valle A. How often are patient and surgeon recovery expectations for total joint arthroplasty aligned? Results of a pilot study. HSS J. 2011;7:229–34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Noble PC, Conditt MA, Cook KF, Mathis KB. The John Insall Award: patient expectations affect satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:35–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Noble PC, Fuller-Lafreniere S, Meftah M, Dwyer MK. Challenges in outcome measurement: discrepancies between patient and provider definitions of success. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:3437–45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Harris IA, Harris AM, Naylor JM, Mittal R, Dao AT. Discordance between patient and surgeon satisfaction after total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2013;28:722–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kahlenberg C, Nwachukwu BU, McLawhorn AS, Cross MB, Cornell CN, Padgett DE. Patient satisfaction after total knee replacement: a systematic review. HSS J. 2018;14(2):192–201.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Jain D, Nguyen L-C, Bendich I, Nguyen LL, Lewis CG, Huddleston JI, Duwelius PJ, Feeley BT, Bozic KJ. Higher patient expectations predict higher patient-reported outcomes, but not satisfaction, in total knee arthroplasty patients: a prospective multicenter study. J Arthroplast. 2017;32:S166–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jain D, Bendich I, Nguyen L-C, Nguyen LL, Lewis CG, Huddleston JI, Duwelius PJ, Feeley BT, Bozic KJ. Do patient expectations influence patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction in total hip arthroplasty? A prospective, multicenter study. J Arthoplasty. 2017;32:3322–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Scott CEH, Oliver WM, MacDonald D, Wade FA, Moran M, Breusch SJ. Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty in patients under 55 years of age. Bone Jt J. 2016;98-B(12):1625–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Yoo JH, Chang CB, Kang YG, Kim SJ, Seong SC, Kim TK. Patient expectations of total knee replacement and their association with sociodemographic factors and functional status. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(3):337–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mahomed N, Gandhi R, Daltroy L, Katz JN. The self-administered patient satisfaction scale for primary hip and knee arthroplasty. Arthritis. 2011;2011:591253.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Gandhi R, Davey JR, Mahomed NN. Predicting patient dissatisfaction following joint replacement surgery. J Rheumatol. 2008;35(12):2415–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Golladay GJ, Bradbury TL, Gordon AC, Fernandez-Madrid IJ, Krebs VE, Patel PD, Suarez JC, Higuera Rueda CA, Barsoum WK. Are patients more satisfied with a balanced total knee arthroplasty? J Arthroplast. 2019;34(7):S195–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Matsuda S, Kawhara S, Okazaki K, Tashiro Y, Iwamoto Y. Postoperative alignment and ROM affect patient satisfaction after TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:127–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lane JV, Hamilton DF, MacDonald DJ, Ellis C, Howie CR. Factors that shape the patient’s hospital experience and satisfaction with lower limb arthroplasty: an exploratory thematic analysis. BMJ Open. 2016;6(5):e010871.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Noble PC, Scuderi GR, Brekke AC, Sikorskii A, Benjamin JB, Lonner JH, Chadha P, Daylamani DA, Scott WN, Bourne RB. Development of a new knee society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:20–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dobson F, Hinman RS, Hall M, Terwee CB, Roos EM, Bennell KL. Measurement properties of performance based measures to assess physical function in hip and knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2012;20(12):1548–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Shim J, Hamilton DF. Comparative responsiveness of the PROMIS-10 global health and EQ-5D questionnaires in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Bone Jt J. 2019;101-B:832–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Ko Y, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, et al. Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36, Oxford knee score, and the knee society clinical rating system in patients undergoing total knee replacement. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(9):2455–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Clement ND, Weir D, Holland JP, Gerrand CH, Deehan DJ. An overview and predictors of achieving the postoperative ceiling effect of the WOMAC score following total knee arthroplasty. J Arthoplasty. 2019;34(2):273–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Garbuz DS, Xu M, Sayre EC. Patients’ outcome after total hip arthroplasty: a comparison between the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index and the Oxford 12-item hip score. J Arthroplast. 2006;21(7):998–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Scuderi GR, Bourne RB, Noble PC, Benjamin JB, Lonner JH, Scott WN. The new knee society knee scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:3–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nilsdotter AK, Lohmander LS, Klässbo M, Roos EM. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS) – validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003;4:10.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Wylde V, Learmonth ID, Cavendish VJ. The oxford hip score: the patient’s perspective. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS. The ‘forgotten joint’ as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient reported outcome measure. J Arthroplast. 2012;27(3):430–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Thienpont E, Opsomer G, Koninckx A, Houssiau F. Joint awareness in different types of knee arthroplasty evaluated with the Forgotten Joint Score. J Arthroplast. 2014;29(1):49–51.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Thompson SM, Salmon LJ, Webb JM, Pinczewski LA, Roe JP. Construct validity and test re-test reliability of the forgotten joint score. J Arthtroplasty. 2015;30(11):1902–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Bryan S, Goldsmith LJ, Davis JC, Hejazi S, MacDonald V, McAllister P, Randall E, Suryaprakash N, Wu AD, Sawatzky R. Revisiting patient satisfaction following total knee arthroplasty: a longitudinal observational study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):423.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Halawi MF, Jongbloed W, Baron S, Savoy L, Cote MP, Liberman JR. Patient-reported outcome measures are not a valid proxy for patient satisfaction in total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2019;23:S0883–5403.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ayers DC, Zheng H, Franklin PD. Integrating patient reported outcomes into orthopaedic clinical practice: proof of concept from FORCE-TJR. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(11):3419–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Ayers DC, Bozic KJ. The importance of outcome measurement in orthopedics. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(11):3409–11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Kohring JM, Pelt CE, Anderson MB, Peters CL, Gililland JM. Press ganey outpatient medical practice survey scores do not correlate with patient-reported outcomes after primary joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2018;33(8):2417–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Chughtai M, Gwam CU, Khlopas A, Sodhi N, Delanois RE, Spindler KP, Mont MA. No correlation between press ganey survey responses and outcomes in post-total hip arthroplasty patients. J Arthtroplasty. 2018;33(3):783–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Houston McGovern Medical School, Houston, TX, USA

    Elizabeth P. Davis, Adam M. Freedhand, David Rodriguez-Quintana & Philip C. Noble

Authors
  1. Elizabeth P. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam M. Freedhand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Rodriguez-Quintana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philip C. Noble
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth P. Davis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Northwell Orthopedic Institute, New York, NY, USA

    Giles R. Scuderi

  2. The Orthopaedic Center of New Jersey, Somerset, NJ, USA

    Alfred J. Tria

  3. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA

    Fred D. Cushner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Davis, E.P., Freedhand, A.M., Rodriguez-Quintana, D., Noble, P.C. (2020). Achieving Satisfaction with Patient-Reported Outcomes: PROMS. In: Scuderi, G., Tria, A., Cushner, F. (eds) Rapid Recovery in Total Joint Arthroplasty. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41223-4_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41223-4_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-41222-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-41223-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation