TY - JOUR
T1 - Is the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Feasible in Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients?
AU - Lawrie, Charles M.
AU - Abu-Amer, Wahid Y.
AU - Clohisy, John C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - Background: Several bundled payment plans, like the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative for total joint arthroplasty, have been introduced to decrease costs and improve clinical care. Measuring clinical outcomes with efficient, standardized methodologies is essential to determine the relative value of total joint arthroplasty care. We investigated feasibility and responsiveness of the recently developed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. Methods: We included patients with preoperative and 1-year PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression (DEP) scores who received unilateral primary TKA. Burden was assessed using the number of questions and time required for PROMIS completion. The minimum clinically important difference was defined as 5. Floor/ceiling effects were noted if more than 15% of patients responded with the lowest/highest possible score, respectively. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare categorical data. Analysis of variance was used for PROMIS comparisons. Results: In total, 172 knees (54 BPCI) were included. Floor effects were identified for DEP at baseline (non-BPCI) and follow-up (both groups), and for PI at follow-up only (BPCI). Patients required 140 seconds and 16 questions to answer all 3 PROMIS domains. Sixty-seven percent, 60%, and 44% of knees achieved minimum clinically important difference in PI, PF, and DEP scores respectively, with no significant difference between groups. The BPCI cohort was older (P <.001) with a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score (P =.028). There were no significant differences in scores between BPCI and non-BPCI patients. Conclusion: PROMIS is feasible and time-efficient in BPCI patients undergoing primary TKA. There were no significant differences in outcomes between BPCI and non-BPCI knees. Level of Evidence: Level III.
AB - Background: Several bundled payment plans, like the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) initiative for total joint arthroplasty, have been introduced to decrease costs and improve clinical care. Measuring clinical outcomes with efficient, standardized methodologies is essential to determine the relative value of total joint arthroplasty care. We investigated feasibility and responsiveness of the recently developed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients. Methods: We included patients with preoperative and 1-year PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Pain Interference (PI), and Depression (DEP) scores who received unilateral primary TKA. Burden was assessed using the number of questions and time required for PROMIS completion. The minimum clinically important difference was defined as 5. Floor/ceiling effects were noted if more than 15% of patients responded with the lowest/highest possible score, respectively. Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare categorical data. Analysis of variance was used for PROMIS comparisons. Results: In total, 172 knees (54 BPCI) were included. Floor effects were identified for DEP at baseline (non-BPCI) and follow-up (both groups), and for PI at follow-up only (BPCI). Patients required 140 seconds and 16 questions to answer all 3 PROMIS domains. Sixty-seven percent, 60%, and 44% of knees achieved minimum clinically important difference in PI, PF, and DEP scores respectively, with no significant difference between groups. The BPCI cohort was older (P <.001) with a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score (P =.028). There were no significant differences in scores between BPCI and non-BPCI patients. Conclusion: PROMIS is feasible and time-efficient in BPCI patients undergoing primary TKA. There were no significant differences in outcomes between BPCI and non-BPCI knees. Level of Evidence: Level III.
KW - BPCI
KW - PROMIS
KW - bundled payment
KW - patient-reported outcomes
KW - total knee arthroplasty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097362621&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2020.07.041
DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2020.07.041
M3 - Article
C2 - 32933798
AN - SCOPUS:85097362621
SN - 0883-5403
VL - 36
SP - 6
EP - 12
JO - Journal of Arthroplasty
JF - Journal of Arthroplasty
IS - 1
ER -