Dataset Information

Physical Performance Tests Correlate With Patient-reported Outcomes After Periacetabular Osteotomy: A Prospective Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Individuals with hip dysplasia report significant functional disability that improves with periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Four physical performance measures (PPMs) have been recently validated for use with nonarthritic hip conditions; however, their ability to detect functional improvement and correlate with improvements in popular hip-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments after PAO is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of four PPMs up to 1 year after PAO, compare PPMs with established PRO measures at these time points, and report the acceptability and utility of PPMs for assessing outcomes after PAO.

Methods

Twenty-two participants aged 15 to 39 years completed the timed stair ascent (TSA), sit-to-stand five times (STS5), self-selected walking speed, four-square-step test, and seven hip-specific PRO measures before surgery and at approximately 6 months and 1 year after PAO. They completed questions regarding acceptability and utility of both types of testing. Wilcoxon rank sum test and unpaired Student t-tests were used to assess differences between time points; Spearman correlation and generalized linear modeling were used to determine the relationship between PPMs and PRO measures.

Results

Six months after PAO, participants showed significant improvements on all seven PRO instruments (P < 0.001) and on the STS5 (P = 0.01). At one year, these improvements were maintained and TSA also improved (P = 0.03). Improvement in other PPMs did not reach significance (P = 0.07 and 0.08). The STS5 test demonstrated moderate to strong correlation (|r| = 0.43 to 0.76, P < 0.05) with all PRO measures, and the TSA test demonstrated moderate to strong correlation with almost all measures (|r| = 0.43 to 0.58, P < 0.05). Correlations strengthened on subanalysis of participants with unilateral disease (n = 11) (|r| = 0.56 to 0.94, P < 0.05). All participants (100%) found PPM testing acceptable despite disability; 25% preferred PPMs to PRO measures, whereas 75% of participants found them equal in usefulness.

Discussion

The STS5 and TSA tests demonstrated moderate to very strong correlation with PRO measures at six and 12 months after PAO for dysplasia. These tests could be used as a functional outcome to supplement PRO instruments after PAO.

SUBMITTER: Scott EJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8189615 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Prospective, cross-sectional study.The aim of the study was to determine which radiographic parameters drive patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in primary presentation adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS).Previous literature suggests correlations between PROs and sagittal plane deformity (sagittal vertical axis [SVA], pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis [PI-LL] mismatch, pelvic tilt [PT]). Prior work included revision and primary adult spinal deformity patients. The present study addresses only primary presentation ASLS.Prospective baseline data were analyzed on 286 patients enrolled in an NIH RO1 clinical trial by nine centers from 2010 to 2014.40 to 80 years old, lumbar Cobb (LC) 30° or higher and Scoliosis Research Society-23 score 4.0 or less in Pain, Function or Self-Image domains, or Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) 20 or higher. Patients were primary presentation (no prior spinal deformity surgery) and had complete baseline data: standing coronal/sagittal 36" radiographs and PROs (ODI, Scoliosis Research Society-23, Short Form-12). Correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate relations between radiographic parameters and PROs for the study population and a subset of patients with ODI 40 or higher. Analysis of variance was used to identify differences in PROs for radiographic modifier groups.Mean age was 60.3 years. Mean spinopelvic parameters were: LL?=?-39.2°; SVA?=?3.1 cm; sacral slope?=?32.5°; PT?=?23.9°; PI-LL mismatch?=?16.8°. Only weak correlations (0.2-0.4) were identified between population sacral slope, SVA and SVA modifiers, and SRS function. SVA and SVA modifiers were weakly associated with ODI. Although there were more correlations in subset analysis of high-symptom patients, all were weak. Analysis of variance identified significant differences in ODI reported by SVA modifier groups.In primary presentation patients with ASLS and a subset of "high-symptom" patients (ODI???40), only weak associations between baseline PROs and radiographic parameters were identified. For this patient population, these results suggest regional radiographic parameters (LC, LL, PT, PI-LL mismatch) are not drivers of PROs and cannot be used to extrapolate effect on patient-perceived pathology.2.

Project description:BackgroundFunctional limitations have been operationally defined for studies of rehabilitation science through measures of physical performance and patient-reported function. Although conceived as representing similar concepts, differences between these 2 modes of measuring physical functioning have not been adequately characterized scientifically.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) with the function component of the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI) with respect to their association with physiologic factors and other psychosocial and health factors potentially influencing rehabilitative care.DesignThis study was a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a sample of community-dwelling older adults (N=137) with mobility limitations enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of exercise.MethodsA performance-based measure of function (the SPPB) and a self-report measure of function (the LLFDI) served as functional outcomes. Physiologic factors included measures of leg strength, leg velocity, and exercise tolerance test (ETT) duration, which served as a surrogate measure of aerobic capacity. Psychosocial and health factors included age, sex, height, body mass index, number of chronic conditions, depression, and falls efficacy.ResultsSeparate multivariable regression models predicting SPPB and LLFDI scores described 33% and 42% of the variance in each outcome (R(2)), respectively. Leg velocity and ETT duration were positively associated with both performance-based and patient-reported functional measures. Leg strength and age were positively associated with SPPB scores, whereas number of chronic conditions, sex, and falls efficacy were associated with the LLFDI scores.LimitationsThis study included older adults with mobility limitations and may not generalize to other populations.ConclusionsPerformance-based and patient-reported measures of physical function appear to assess different aspects of an older person's functioning. The SPPB was associated with age and physiologic factors, whereas patient-reported function measured by the LLFDI was associated with these factors as well as with psychosocial and health factors.