Dataset Information

Are responders to patient health surveys representative of those invited to participate? An analysis of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Pilot from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to evaluate surgical outcome in patients undergoing joint replacement surgery, however routine collection from the target population is often incomplete. Representative samples are required to allow inference from the sample to the population. Although higher capture rates are desired, the extent to which this improves the representativeness of the sample is not known. We aimed to measure the representativeness of data collected using an electronic PROMs capture system with or without telephone call follow up, and any differences in PROMS reporting between electronic and telephone call follow up.

Methods

Data from a pilot PROMs program within a large national joint replacement registry were examined. Telephone call follow up was used for people that failed to respond electronically. Data were collected pre-operatively and at 6 months post-operatively. Responding groups (either electronic only or electronic plus telephone call follow up) were compared to non-responders based on patient characteristics (joint replaced, bilaterality, age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score and Body Mass Index (BMI)) using chi squared test or ANOVA, and PROMs for the two responder groups were compared using generalised linear models adjusted for age and sex. The analysis was restricted to those undergoing primary elective hip, knee or shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis.

Results

Pre-operatively, 73.2% of patients responded electronically and telephone follow-up of non-responders increased this to 91.4%. Pre-operatively, patients responding electronically, compared to all others, were on average younger, more likely to be female, and healthier (lower ASA score). Similar differences were found when telephone follow up was included in the responding group. There were little (if any) differences in the post-operative comparisons, where electronic responders were on average one year younger and were more likely to have a lower ASA score compared to those not responding electronically, but there was no significant difference in sex or BMI. PROMs were similar between those reporting electronically and those reporting by telephone.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing total joint replacement who provide direct electronic PROMs data are younger, healthier and more likely to be female than non-responders, but these differences are small, particularly for post-operative data collection. The addition of telephone call follow up to electronic contact does not provide a more representative sample. Electronic-only follow up of patients undergoing joint replacement provides a satisfactory representation of the population invited to participate.

SUBMITTER: Harris IA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8253407 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo elicit informed views from Australian women aged 70-74 regarding the acceptability of ceasing to invite women their age to participate in government-funded mammography screening (BreastScreen).DesignTwo community juries held in 2017.SettingGreater Sydney, a metropolis of 4.5 million people in New South Wales, Australia.Participants34 women aged 70-74 with no personal history of breast cancer, recruited by random digit dialling and previously randomly recruited list-based samples.Main outcomes and measuresJury verdict and rationale in response to structured questions. We transcribed audio-recorded jury proceedings and identified central reasons for the jury's decision.ResultsThe women's average age was 71.5 years. Participants were of diverse sociocultural backgrounds, with the sample designed to include women of lower levels of educational attainment. Both juries concluded by majority verdict (16-2 and 10-6) that BreastScreen should continue to send invitations and promote screening to their age group. Reasons given for the majority position include: (1) sending the invitations shows that society still cares about older women, empowers them to access preventive health services and recognises increasing and varied life expectancy; (2) screening provides women with information that enables choice and (3) if experts cannot agree, the conservative approach is to maintain the status quo until the evidence is clear. Reasons for the minority position were the potential for harms through overdiagnosis and misallocation of scarce health resources.ConclusionsPreventive programmes such as mammography screening are likely to have significant symbolic value once they are socially embedded. Arguments for programme de-implementation emphasising declining benefit because of limited life expectancy and the risks of overdiagnosis seem unlikely to resonate with healthy older women. In situations where there is no consensus among experts on the value of established screening programmes, people may strongly prefer receiving information about their health and having the opportunity make their own choices.

Project description:ObjectivesPersonality differences between doctors and patients can affect treatment outcomes. We examine these trait disparities, as well as differences across medical specialities.DesignRetrospective, observational statistical analysis of secondary data.SettingData from two data sets that are nationally representative of doctors and the general population in Australia.ParticipantsWe include 23 358 individuals from a representative survey of the general Australian population (with subgroups of 18 705 patients, 1261 highly educated individuals and 5814 working in caring professions) as well as 19 351 doctors from a representative survey of doctors in Australia (with subgroups of 5844 general practitioners, 1776 person-oriented specialists and 3245 technique-oriented specialists).Main outcome measuresBig Five personality traits and locus of control. Measures are standardised by gender, age and being born overseas and weighted to be representative of their population.ResultsDoctors are significantly more agreeable (a: standardised score -0.12, 95% CIs -0.18 to -0.06), conscientious (c: -0.27 to -0.33 to -0.20), extroverted (e: 0.11, 0.04 to 0.17) and neurotic (n: 0.14, CI 0.08 to 0.20) than the general population (a: -0.38 to -0.42 to -0.34, c: -0.96 to -1.00 to -0.91, e: -0.22 to -0.26 to -0.19, n: -1.01 to -1.03 to -0.98) or patients (a: -0.77 to -0.85 to -0.69, c: -1.27 to -1.36 to -1.19, e: -0.24 to -0.31 to -0.18, n: -0.71 to -0.76 to -0.66). Patients (-0.03 to -0.10 to 0.05) are more open than doctors (-0.30 to -0.36 to -0.23). Doctors have a significantly more external locus of control (0.06, 0.00 to 0.13) than the general population (-0.10 to -0.13 to -0.06) but do not differ from patients (-0.04 to -0.11 to 0.03). There are minor differences in personality traits among doctors with different specialities.ConclusionsSeveral personality traits differ between doctors, the population and patients. Awareness about differences can improve doctor-patient communication and allow patients to understand and comply with treatment recommendations.

Project description:BackgroundWith advances in health state valuation methods, new value sets may be developed for some countries. Quantifying the impact of moving between existing and new value sets is critical for guiding decisions around utility score interpretation, reporting and comparison with published scores.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to examine, using large-scale national registry data, how the new Australian EQ-5D-5L value set impacts utility scores for patients undergoing joint replacement.MethodsData from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry were used for this analysis. All primary total hip (THR), knee (TKR), and shoulder replacement (TSR) procedures between 2018 and 2022 with pre-operative and 6-month post-operative EQ-5D-5L data were included. Utility scores were generated using the 2013 and 2023 Australian value sets ('previous' and 'new' value sets, respectively) and analysed descriptively for each joint replacement cohort. Agreement between the two utility score sets was evaluated using concordance correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsEQ-5D-5L data were available for 17,576 THR, 23,010 TKR, and 1667 TSR procedures. The new value set produced a lowest possible EQ-5D-5L utility score of -0.30 (compared with -0.68 previously) and fewer patients had 'worse-than-dead' quality of life (score < 0.00) before surgery. Mean pre-operative scores were 0.21 (THR), 0.19 (TKR), and 0.17 (TSR) units higher with the new value set, and mean post-operative scores were 0.11-0.14 units higher. The new value set resulted in smaller effect sizes for the THR (1.08 versus 1.23) and TKR cohorts (0.86 versus 0.92). There was moderate-to-good overall agreement (coefficients: 0.70-0.80), but concordance varied by time point.ConclusionAlthough acceptable agreement was evident, the new Australian value set produces less extreme negative utility scores and markedly higher group-level scores. Transition to reporting new EQ-5D-5L utility scores will require accompanying explanation to signal measurement modifications rather than better quality of life.

Project description:PurposeInfection is a major complication following joint replacement (JR) surgery. However, little data exist regarding antibiotic utilisation following primary JR and how use changes with subsequent revision surgery. This study aimed to examine variation in antibiotic utilisation rates before and after hip replacement surgery in those revised for infection, revised for other reasons and those without revision.MethodsThis retrospective cohort analysis used linked data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry and Australian Government Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Patients were included if undergoing total hip replacement (THR) for osteoarthritis in private hospitals between 2002 and 2017. Three groups were examined: primary THR with no subsequent revision (n = 102 577), primary THR with a subsequent revision for reasons other than periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 3156) and primary THR with a subsequent revision for PJI (n = 520). Monthly antibiotic utilisation rates and prevalence rate ratios (PRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in the 2 years pre- and post-THR.ResultsPrior to primary THR antibiotic utilisation was 9%-10%. After primary THR, antibiotic utilisation rates were higher among patients revised for PJI (PRR 1.69, 95% CI 1.60-1.79) compared to non-revised patients, while the utilisation rate was lower in patients revised for reasons other than infection (PRR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.98). For those revised for infection, antibiotic utilisation post-revision surgery was two times higher than those revised for other reasons (PRR 2.16, 95% CI 2.08-2.23). Utilisation of injectable antibiotics including, vancomycin, flucloxacillin and cephazolin was higher in those revised for PJI patients 0-2 weeks following surgery but not in those revised for other reasons compared to the non-revised group.ConclusionsOngoing antibiotic utilisation after primary surgery may be an early signal of problems with the THR and should be a prompt for primary care physicians to refer patients to specialists for further appropriate investigations and management.

Project description:National projections of future joint replacement use can help us understand the changing burden of severe osteoarthritis. This study aimed to compare actual utilisation rates for primary total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR) to previously forecast estimates for Australia. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry and Australian Bureau of Statistics were used to calculate 'actual' THR and TKR utilisation rates for the years 2014-2019, by sex and age group. 'Forecast' utilisation rates for 2014-2019 were derived from an earlier study that modelled two alternate scenarios for THR and TKR in Australia: Scenario 1 assumed a constant rate of surgery; Scenario 2 assumed continued growth in surgery rates. Actual utilisation rates were compared descriptively to forecast rates for females and males (overall and by age group). Rate ratios were calculated to indicate the association between actual and forecast THR and TKR rates, with a rate ratio of 1.00 reflecting perfect alignment. Over the study period, 191,996 THRs (53% in females) and 312,203 TKRs (55% in females) were performed. For both sexes, actual rates lay clearly between the Scenario 1 and 2 forecast estimates. In 2019, actual THR utilisation rates were 179 per 100,000 females (Scenario 1: 156; Scenario 2: 200) and 158 per 100,000 males (Scenario 1: 139; Scenario 2: 191). Actual TKR utilisation rates in 2019 were 289 per 100,000 females (Scenario 1: 275; Scenario 2: 387) and 249 per 100,000 males (Scenario 1: 216; Scenario 2: 312). Age-specific rate ratios were close to 1.00 for all age groups, indicating good alignment between forecast and actual joint replacement rates. These validation analyses showed that linear plus exponential growth forecasting scenarios provided an efficient approximation of actual joint replacement utilisation. This indicates our modelling techniques can be used to judiciously predict future surgery demand, including for age groups with high surgery rates.