Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Volume 20, Issue 2 , Pages 87-92 , February 2012

Patient acceptable symptom state and OMERACT–OARSI set of responder criteria in joint replacement. Identification of cut-off values

  • A. Escobar

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Investigación, Hospital de Basurto – CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence and reprint requests to: A. Escobar, Unidad de Investigación, Hospital de Basurto, Avenida de Montevideo, 18, 48013 Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain. Tel: 34-94-400-6309; Fax: 34-94-400-6306.
    • ,
  • M. Gonzalez

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Investigación, Hospital de Basurto – CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain
    • ,
  • J.M. Quintana

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Investigación, Hospital de Galdakao – CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain
    • ,
  • K. Vrotsou

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Investigación, Hospital de Basurto – CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain
    • ,
  • A. Bilbao

      Affiliations

    • Fundación Vasca de Innovación e Investigación Sanitarias (BIOEF) – CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Sondika, Bizkaia, Spain
    • ,
  • C. Herrera-Espiñeira

      Affiliations

    • Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain
    • ,
  • L. Garcia-Perez

      Affiliations

    • Planning and Evaluation Service, Canary Islands Health Service – CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain
    • ,
  • F. Aizpuru

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Investigacion, Hospital de Txagorritxu – CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain
    • ,
  • C. Sarasqueta

      Affiliations

    • Unidad de Investigación, Hospital de Donostia – CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain

Received 23 August 2011 ,Accepted 14 November 2011.

References 

  1. Ethgen O, Bruyere O, Richy F, et al. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 May;86-A(5):963–974
  2. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Beaton D, et al. Minimal clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state for subjective outcome measures in rheumatic disorders. J Rheumatol. 2007 May;34(5):1188–1193
  3. Pham T, van der HD, Altman RD, et al. OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004 May;12(5):389–399
  4. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Jan;64(1):34–37
  5. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, 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 Dec;15(12):1833–1840
  6. Singh J, Sloan JA, Johanson NA. Challenges with health-related quality of life assessment in arthroplasty patients: problems and solutions. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010 Feb;18(2):72–82
  7. Batlle-Gualda E, Esteve-Vives J, Piera MC, et al. Tradución y adaptación al español del cuestionario WOMAC específico para artrosis de rodilla y cadera. Rev Esp Reumatol. 1999;26:38–45
  8. Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol. 2002 Nov 19;21:466–471
  9. Kvien TK, Heiberg T, Hagen KB. Minimal clinically important improvement/difference (MCII/MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): what do these concepts mean?. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007 Nov;66(Suppl 3):iii40–iii41
  10. Dougados M, Moore A, Yu S, et al. Evaluation of the patient acceptable symptom state in a pooled analysis of two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies evaluating lumiracoxib and celecoxib in patients with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9(1):R11
  11. Heiberg T, Kvien TK, Mowinckel P, et al. Identification of disease activity and health status cut-off points for the symptom state acceptable to patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008 Jul;67(7):967–971
  12. Tubach F, Pham T, Skomsvoll JF, et al. Stability of the patient acceptable symptomatic state over time in outcome criteria in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Dec 15;55(6):960–963
  13. Tubach F, Dougados M, Falissard B, et al. Feeling good rather than feeling better matters more to patients. Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Aug 15;55(4):526–530
  14. Khanna PP, Maranian P, Gregory J, et al. The minimally important difference and patient acceptable symptom state for the Raynaud’s condition score in patients with Raynaud’s phenomenon in a large randomised controlled clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Mar;69(3):588–591
  15. Arden NK, Kiran A, Judge A, et al. What is a good patient reported outcome after total hip replacement?. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011 Feb;19(2):155–162
  16. Rother M, Lavins BJ, Kneer W, et al. Efficacy and safety of epicutaneous ketoprofen in Transfersome (IDEA-033) versus oral celecoxib and placebo in osteoarthritis of the knee: multicentre randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007 Sep;66(9):1178–1183
  17. Verkleij SP, Luijsterburg PA, Koes BW, et al. Effectiveness of diclofenac versus acetaminophen in primary care patients with knee osteoarthritis: [NTR1485], DIPA-trial: design of a randomized clinical trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;11:7
  18. Ruff KJ, Winkler A, Jackson RW, et al. Eggshell membrane in the treatment of pain and stiffness from osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study. Clin Rheumatol. 2009 Aug;28(8):907–914
  19. van Raaij TM, Reijman M, Brouwer RW, et al. Medial knee osteoarthritis treated by insoles or braces: a randomized trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Jul;468(7):1926–1932
  20. Bar-Ziv Y, Beer Y, Ran Y, et al. A treatment applying a biomechanical device to the feet of patients with knee osteoarthritis results in reduced pain and improved function: a prospective controlled study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;11:179
  21. Lin CW, March L, Crosbie J, et al. Maximum recovery after knee replacement – the MARKER study rationale and protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10:69
  22. Rissanen P, Aro S, Slatis P, et al. Health and quality of life before and after hip or knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1995 Apr;10(2):169–175
  23. Wylde V, Dieppe P, Hewlett S, et al. Total knee replacement: is it really an effective procedure for all?. Knee. 2007 Dec;14(6):417–423
  24. Chesworth BM, Mahomed NN, Bourne RB, et al. Willingness to go through surgery again validated the WOMAC clinically important difference from THR/TKR surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Sep;61(9):907–918
  25. Bourne RB, Chesworth B, Davis A, et al. Comparing patient outcomes after THA and TKA: is there a difference?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Feb;468(2):542–546
  26. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, et al. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Jan;468(1):57–63

PII: S1063-4584(11)00316-5

doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.11.007

Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Volume 20, Issue 2 , Pages 87-92 , February 2012

Article Tools