Predictive Tool Use and Willingness for Surgery in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.


Journal

JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 Mar 2024
Historique:
medline: 8 3 2024
pubmed: 8 3 2024
entrez: 8 3 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Despite the increasing number of tools available to predict the outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), the effect of these predictive tools on patient decision-making remains uncertain. To assess the effect of an online predictive tool on patient-reported willingness to undergo TKA. This parallel, double-masked, 2-arm randomized clinical trial compared predictive tool use with treatment as usual (TAU). The study was conducted between June 30, 2022, and July 31, 2023. Participants were followed up for 6 months after enrollment. Participants were recruited from a major Australian private health insurance company and from the surgical waiting list for publicly funded TKA at a tertiary hospital. Eligible participants had unilateral knee osteoarthritis, were contemplating TKA, and had previously tried nonsurgical interventions, such as lifestyle modifications, physiotherapy, and pain medications. The intervention group was provided access to an online predictive tool at the beginning of the study. This tool offered information regarding the likelihood of improvement in quality of life if patients chose to undergo TKA. The predictions were based on the patient's age, sex, and baseline symptoms. Conversely, the control group received TAU without access to the predictive tool. The primary outcome measure was the reduction in participants' willingness to undergo surgery at 6 months after tool use as measured by binomial logistic regression. Secondary outcome measures included participant treatment preference and the quality of their decision-making process as measured by the Knee Decision Quality Instrument. Of 211 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 65.8 [8.3] years; 118 female [55.9%]), 105 were allocated to the predictive tool group and 106 to the TAU group. After adjusting for baseline differences in willingness for surgery, the predictive tool did not significantly reduce the primary outcome of willingness for surgery at 6 months (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.42-1.71; P = .64). Despite the absence of treatment effect on willingness for TKA, predictive tools might still enhance health outcomes of patients with knee osteoarthritis. Additional research is needed to optimize the design and implementation of predictive tools, address limitations, and fully understand their effect on the decision-making process in TKA. ANZCTR.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12622000072718.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38457182
pii: 2815842
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.0890
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e240890

Auteurs

Yushy Zhou (Y)

Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Lauren Patten (L)

Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Tim Spelman (T)

Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Samantha Bunzli (S)

School of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Physiotherapy Department, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Peter F M Choong (PFM)

Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Michelle M Dowsey (MM)

Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Chris Schilling (C)

Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Classifications MeSH