• C Allyson Jones and Sheri Pohar.
• Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Corbett Hall, Edmonton, Canada. cajones@ualberta.ca
• Clin. Geriatr. Med. 2012 Aug 1;28(3):395-429.

AbstractA scoping review was completed to summarize the change in health status after THA and TKA. Although a recent study has performed a systematic review of functional recovery after THA,(61) we reviewed a broad topic of HRQL changes after total joint arthroplasty. This scoping review was not restricted by study design; however, the majority of studies were prospective single group, observational studies so that change over time could be reported. A variety of HRQL measures were used, including disease-specific, generic, and utility measures. We reported on 33 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Most studies’ primary outcomes were disease-specific measures. Not surprisingly, MCIDs were reported with recovery both short term and long term. These clinically relevant changes were accompanied with large effect sizes for pain and function using disease-specific measures such as the WOMAC. In general, smaller changes were reported with joint stiffness; however, this may also be related to inherent measurement properties of the WOMAC in that it uses two questions to evaluate stiffness. Overall, large effect sizes, in excess of 1.0, were seen not only short term but also long term, that is, more than a year after surgery. The changes may also be reflected in the low rate of complications reported with total joint arthroplasty.(62) The generic health measures showed a smaller magnitude of change, which is to be expected given the construct of these measures evaluate overall health and includes the effect of other health conditions. That being said, the largest changes were seen in those domains that were primary to total joint arthroplasty, pain and physical function. A challenge of evaluating change of health status after total joint arthroplasty is that each measure has individual strengths and limitations. This review introduced the measures and the MCIDs when available to evaluate clinical change. The derived MCIDs should be considered carefully because these values are dependent on a number of features such as the study setting, methodology used to derive the values, baseline scores, and severity of the disease.(63) Change over time was also presented by the effect sizes. The effect size provided another perspective to measuring recovery after total joint arthroplasty in which comparison across measures can be made. Regardless of the type of outcome measure, large effect sizes are seen with total joint arthroplasty both over short-term and long-term outcomes. Because a number of HRQL measures are used to evaluate the outcomes after total joint arthroplasties, comparisons can be challenging. This review summarized published findings to help place the magnitude of change seen with total joint arthroplasty in perspective. Changes seen with HRQL are one aspect of evaluating outcomes from a patient perspective; however, recovery is a complex concept(64) that needs many clinical and research-oriented measures to evaluate the full spectrum of recovery.

20 keywords...

hide…