An individualized patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) based patient decision aid and surgeon report for patients considering total knee arthroplasty: protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Nick Bansback, Logan Trenaman, Karen V MacDonald, Gillian Hawker, Jeffrey A Johnson, Dawn Stacey, Deborah A Marshall, Nick Bansback, Logan Trenaman, Karen V MacDonald, Gillian Hawker, Jeffrey A Johnson, Dawn Stacey, Deborah A Marshall

Abstract

Background: While the rates of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to rise worldwide, there are concerns about whether all surgeries are appropriate. Guidelines for appropriateness suggest that patients should have realistic expectations for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and that the patient and their surgeon should agree that the potential benefits outweigh the potential harms. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether routinely collected pre- and post-TKA patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) could be integrated into a patient decision aid to better inform these appropriateness criteria. This randomised trial will evaluate the preliminary efficacy of a tailored PROM-based patient decision aid and surgeon report (compared to usual care) for patients considering TKA on decision quality.

Methods: This is a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial conducted at one site in Alberta, Canada. Adults over the age of 30 years, who have been scheduled for a TKA consultation at the Edmonton Bone and Joint Centre with a participating surgeon, who understand, speak, and read English, and can provide informed consent, are eligible to participate. Participants will be randomised to receive a PROM-based patient decision aid and surgeon report before their surgical consultation or usual care. The decision aid will provide patients with information on their expected outcomes based on the EQ-5D-5L PROM, and these estimates are individualized based on clinical and demographic characteristics. The primary outcome of this trial is decision quality. Analysis will consider outcomes intention to treat, and feasibility outcomes for implementing the trial to routine practise.

Discussion: This patient decision aid and surgeon report intervention could contribute to improved treatment decision-making for patients considering total knee arthroplasty.

Trial registration (registry and number): ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03240913. Registered on August 1, 2017.

Keywords: Decision quality; Osteoarthritis; Patient-reported outcome measures; Total knee arthroplasty.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study has been approved by the University of Calgary and University of British Columbia Research Ethics Boards. Any modifications to this protocol that impact study procedures or analysis will result in an amendment to the protocol and ethics application. All participants are asked to sign an informed consent form prior to being included in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: support from the EuroQol group for funding the research (NB and DAM); no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. Consulting fees from Washington State Health Care Authority for providing training in the use of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards that the healthcare authority are using for certifying patient decision aids from January to June 2017 (DS), membership of the EuroQol research group (NB).

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Routine practice and study-specific procedures. PHN: Personal Health Number; h: hip; k: knee; l: left; r: right; QoL: Quality of Life; ABJHI: Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute; SDM: Shared Decision Making
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Overview of PROM-based decision aid. EQ-5D: EuroQol Questionnaire 5-Dimensions; HK-DQI: Hip and Knee Decision Quality Instrument; CPS: Control Preferences Scale

References

    1. Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). Hip and Knee Replacements in Canada: 2015/16 Quick Stats. 2017. (accessed 21 Dec 2016).
    1. Cram P, Lu X, Kates SL, et al. Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991-2010. JAMA. 2012;308:1227–1236. doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11153.
    1. Smith AJ, Wood DJ, Li M-G. Total knee replacement with and without patellar resurfacing: a prospective, randomised trial using the profix total knee system. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:43–49. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B1.18986.
    1. Hawker G, Bohm ER, Conner-Spady B, et al. Perspectives of Canadian stakeholders on criteria for appropriateness for total joint arthroplasty in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2015;67:1806–1815. doi: 10.1002/art.39124.
    1. Hoffmann TC, Del Mar C. Patients’ expectations of the benefits and harms of treatments, screening, and tests: a systematic review. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175:274–286. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6016.
    1. Hamilton DF, Lane JV, Gaston P, et al. What determines patient satisfaction with surgery? A prospective cohort study of 4709 patients following total joint replacement. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002525. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002525.
    1. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, et al. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop. 2010;468:57–63. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9.
    1. Hawker GA, Wright JG, Coyte PC, et al. Determining the need for hip and knee arthroplasty: the role of clinical severity and patients’ preferences. Med Care. 2001;39:206. doi: 10.1097/00005650-200103000-00002.
    1. Skou ST, Roos EM, Laursen MB, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of total knee replacement. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:1597–1606. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1505467.
    1. Klett M-J, Frankovich R, Dervin GF, et al. Impact of a surgical screening clinic for patients with knee osteoarthritis: a descriptive study. Clin J Sport Med. 2012;22:274–277. doi: 10.1097/JSM.0b013e318248ed24.
    1. Sepucha KR, Borkhoff CM, Lally J, et al. Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids: key constructs and measurement instruments. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:S12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S12.
    1. Stacey D, Taljaard M, Dervin D, Geoffrey, et al. Impact of patient decision aids on appropriate and timely access to hip or knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2015;24:99–107. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.07.024.
    1. Bozic KJ, Belkora J, Chan V, et al. Shared decision making in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: results of a randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:1633–1639. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00004.
    1. Stacey D, Hawker G, Dervin G, et al. Decision aid for patients considering total knee arthroplasty with preference report for surgeons: a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15:54. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-54.
    1. Arterburn D, Wellman R, Westbrook E, et al. Introducing decision aids at group health was linked to sharply lower hip and knee surgery rates and costs. Health Aff (Millwood) 2012;31:2094–2104. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2011.0686.
    1. Trenaman L, Stacey D, Bryan S, et al. Decision aids for patients considering total joint replacement: a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised controlled trial. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25:1615–1622. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2017.05.022.
    1. Lange T, Rataj E, Kopkow C, et al. Outcome assessment in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and critical appraisal. J Arthroplast. 2017;32:653–665.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.09.014.
    1. Hawker GA. Who, when, and why total joint replacement surgery? The patient’s perspective. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2006;18:526–530. doi: 10.1097/01.bor.0000240367.62583.51.
    1. Dawson J, Doll H, Fitzpatrick R, et al The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings. BMJ 2010;340:c186–c186. 10.1136/bmj.c186.
    1. Devlin NJ, Parkin D, Browne J. Patient-reported outcome measures in the NHS: new methods for analysing and reporting EQ-5D data. Health Econ. 2010;19:886–905. doi: 10.1002/hec.1608.
    1. Bansback N, Trenaman L, Bryan S, et al. Using routine patient reported outcome measures to enhance patient decision making: a proof of concept study. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:109.
    1. Gutacker N, Street A. Use of large-scale HRQoL datasets to generate individualised predictions and inform patients about the likely benefit of surgery. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil Published Online First. May 2017:31. 10.1007/s11136-017-1599-0.
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346:e7586. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e7586.
    1. Coulter A, Stilwell D, Kryworuchko J, et al. A systematic development process for patient decision aids. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13(S2). 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S2.
    1. Bansback N, Li LC, Lynd L, et al. Development and preliminary user testing of the DCIDA (dynamic computer interactive decision application) for “nudging” patients towards high quality decisions. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014;14:62. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-14-62.
    1. McAlindon TE, Bannuru RR, Sullivan MC, et al. OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2014;22:363–388. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2014.01.003.
    1. Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L) Qual Life Res. 2011;20:1727–1736. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9903-x.
    1. Sepucha KR, Stacey D, Clay CF, et al. Decision quality instrument for treatment of hip and knee osteoarthritis: a psychometric evaluation. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:149. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-149.
    1. Hurst NP, Kind P, Ruta D, et al. Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: validity, responsiveness and reliability of EuroQol (EQ-5D) Br J Rheumatol. 1997;36:551–559. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/36.5.551.
    1. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW, 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. J Rheumatol. 1988;15:1833–1840.
    1. McConnell S, Kolopack P, Davis AM. The Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45:453–461. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(200110)45:5<453::AID-ART365>;2-W.
    1. Légaré F, Kearing S, Clay K, et al. Are you SURE?: assessing patient decisional conflict with a 4-item screening test. Can Fam Physician Médecin Fam Can. 2010;56:e308–e314.
    1. Lf D, Ja S, Venkatesh P. The control preferences scale. Can J Nurs Res Rev Can Rech En Sci Infirm. 1996;29:21–43.
    1. Elwyn G, Barr PJ, Grande SW, et al. Developing CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of shared decision making in clinical encounters. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;93:102–107. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.05.009.
    1. Barr PJ, Thompson R, Walsh T, et al. The psychometric properties of CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of the shared decision-making process. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16:e2. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3085.
    1. Brehaut JC, O’Connor AM, Wood TJ, et al. Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Mak. 2003;23:281–292. doi: 10.1177/0272989X03256005.
    1. Jorn LP, Johnsson R, Toksvig-Larsen S. Patient satisfaction, function and return to work after knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand. 1999;70:343–347. doi: 10.3109/17453679908997822.
    1. Hawker G, Marshall D, Jones A, et al Age and sex differences in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients’ expectations of Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) Las Vegas, Nevada: 2017.
    1. Hawker G, Marshall D, Jones A, et al The relationship between ‘appropriateness’ constructs and surgeon recommendation for Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Las Vegas, Nevada: 2017.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnieren