Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

Many approaches have been used to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, but the MCID for outcome measures after medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO) for the treatment of medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA) has not been reported.

Purpose:

To define the MCID for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) after MOWHTO and to identify risk factors for not achieving the MCID.

Study Design:

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Among patients with medial compartment knee OA who underwent MOWHTO, 174 patients who were followed for 2 years were included in the study. The MCID and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for the WOMAC were determined using the anchor-based method with a 15-item questionnaire. Preoperative OA severity was measured by the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grading system, and the acceptable range of the postoperative weightbearing line ratio was 50% to 70%. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on whether the MCID and SCB were achieved, and then factors related to failure to achieve the MCID and SCB were analyzed using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results:

The MCID for the WOMAC was 4.2 points for the pain subscale, 1.9 points for the stiffness subscale, 10.1 points for the function subscale, and 16.1 points for the total. Additionally, the SCB for the WOMAC was 6.4 for pain, 2.6 for stiffness, 16.4 for function, and 25.3 for the total. Overall, 116 (66.7%), 99 (56.9%), 127 (73.0%), and 128 (73.6%) patients achieved the MCID for the WOMAC pain, stiffness, function, and total, respectively, after MOWHTO. The odds of not achieving the MCID for the WOMAC total were 1.09 times greater (95% CI, 1.05-1.13; P < .001) in patients with a low preoperative WOMAC total score (cutoff values: 10.5 for pain, 3.5 for stiffness, 34.5 for function, and 51.0 for the total), 11.77 times greater (95% CI, 3.68-37.70; P < .001) in patients with K-L grade 4 OA compared with K-L grades 2 or 3 OA, and 8.39 times greater (95% CI, 2.98-23.63; P < .001) in patients with undercorrection or overcorrection. A low preoperative WOMAC score, K-L grade 4 OA, and undercorrection or overcorrection were also associated with not achieving the SCB for the WOMAC total (all P < .05).

Conclusion:

Patients treated with a MOWHTO require a 16.1-point improvement in the WOMAC total score to achieve a MCID from the procedure. Low preoperative WOMAC scores, severe OA, and undercorrection or overcorrection were related to failure to achieve the MCID.

Keywords

minimal clinically important difference (MCID)Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC)medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy knee osteoarthritis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aglietti

Buzzi

Vena

Baldini

Mondaini

. High tibial valgus osteotomy for medial gonarthrosis: a 10- to 21-year study. J Knee Surg. 2003;16(1):21-26.

Bellamy

Buchanan

Goldsmith

Campbell

Stitt

. 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;15(12):1833-1840.

Berliner

Brodke

Chan

SooHoo

Bozic

. John Charnley Award: preoperative patient-reported outcome measures predict clinically meaningful improvement in function after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):321-329.

Bin

Abd

Razak

Tan

Chen

, et al. Age and preoperative Knee Society score are significant predictors of outcomes among Asians following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(9):735-741.

Çelik

Çoban

Kııçoğlu

. Minimal clinically important difference of commonly used hip-, knee-, foot-, and ankle-specific questionnaires: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019;113:44-57.

Clement

Bardgett

Weir

Holland

Gerrand

Deehan

. What is the minimum clinically important difference for the WOMAC index after TKA? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(10):2005-2014.

Copay

Subach

Glassman

Polly

Jr Schuler

. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 2007;7(5):541-546.

Crosby

Kolotkin

Williams

. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(5):395-407.

Cvetanovich

Gowd

Liu

, et al. Establishing clinically significant outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019;28(5):939-948.

10.

Cvetanovich

Weber

Kuhns

, et al. Hip arthroscopic surgery for femoroacetabular impingement with capsular management: factors associated with achieving clinically significant outcomes. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(2):288-296.

11.

Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures. Use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:79.

12.

El-Azab

Morgenstern

Ahrens

Schuster

Imhoff

Lorenz

. Limb alignment after open-wedge high tibial osteotomy and its effect on the clinical outcome. Orthopedics. 2011;34(10):e622-e628.

13.

Escobar

García Pérez

Herrera-Espiñeira

, et al. Total knee replacement: minimal clinically important differences and responders. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21(12):2006-2012.

14.

Escobar

Quintana

Bilbao

Aróstegui

Lafuente

Vidaurreta

. Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007;15(3):273-280.

15.

Fujisawa

Masuhara

Shiomi

. The effect of high tibial osteotomy on osteoarthritis of the knee: an arthroscopic study of 54 knee joints. Orthop Clin North Am. 1979;10(3):585-608.

16.

Gagnier

. Patient reported outcomes in orthopaedics. J Orthop Res. 2017;35(10):2098-2108.

17.

Goshima

Sawaguchi

Shigemoto

Iwai

Fujita

Yamamuro

. Open-wedge high tibial osteotomy for spontaneous osteonecrosis of the medial tibial plateau shows excellent clinical outcomes. J Exp Orthop. 2020;7(1):14.

18.

Han

Lee

Kim

, et al. Patient-reported outcomes correlate with functional scores after opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy: a clinical study. Int Orthop. 2018;42(5):1067-1074.

19.

Jacquet

Pioger

Khakha

, et al. Evaluation of the “minimal clinically important difference” (MCID) of the KOOS, KSS and SF-12 scores after open-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021;29(3):820-826.

20.

Jaeschke

Singer

Guyatt

. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10(4):407-415.

21.

Juniper

Guyatt

Willan

Griffith

. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47(1):81-87.

22.

Kim

Son

Koh

Bahk

. Intraoperative adjustment of alignment under valgus stress reduces outliers in patients undergoing medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017;137(8):1035-1045.

23.

Koh

Kim

Sohn

, et al. Predictive factors for satisfaction after contemporary unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and high tibial osteotomy in isolated medial femorotibial osteoarthritis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019;105(1):77-83.

24.

Kohn

Sassoon

Fernando

. Classifications in brief: Kellgren-Lawrence classification of osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(8):1886-1893.

25.

Lee

Byun

. High tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2012;24(2):61-69.

26.

Lee

Park

Cho

. Clinical and radiological results with second-look arthroscopic findings after open wedge high tibial osteotomy without arthroscopic procedures for medial meniscal root tears. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2018;30(1):34-41.

27.

Lee

. Disparity between preoperative target correction amount and postoperative correction amount in open wedge high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2019;31(2):126-131.

28.

Lee

Jung

Nam

Jung

Hwang

. The short-term follow-up results of open wedge high tibial osteotomy with using an Aescula open wedge plate and an allogenic bone graft: the minimum 1-year follow-up results. Clin Orthop Surg. 2010;2(1):47-54.

29.

Lizaur-Utrilla

Gonzalez-Parreño

Martinez-Mendez

Miralles-Muñoz

Lopez-Prats

. Minimal clinically important differences and substantial clinical benefits for Knee Society Scores. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28(5):1473-1478.

30.

Lübbeke

. Research methodology for orthopaedic surgeons, with a focus on outcome. EFORT Open Rev. 2018;3(5):160-167.

31.

Lyman

Lee

McLawhorn

Islam

MacLean

. What are the minimal and substantial improvements in the HOOS and KOOS and JR versions after total joint replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476(12):2432-2441.

32.

Maredupaka

Meshram

Chatte

Kim

. Minimal clinically important difference of commonly used patient-reported outcome measures in total knee arthroplasty: review of terminologies, methods and proposed values. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2020;32:1-12.

33.

Marti

Verhagen

Kerkhoffs

Moojen

. Proximal tibial varus osteotomy: indications, technique, and five to twenty-one-year results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83(2):164-170.

34.

McConnell

Kolopack

Davis

. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;45(5):453-461.

35.

Nwachukwu

Chang

Adjei

, et al. Time required to achieve minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(11):2601-2606.

36.

Nwachukwu

Chang

Fields

, et al. Defining the “substantial clinical benefit” after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(6):1297-1303.

37.

Nwachukwu

Fields

Chang

Nawabi

Kelly

Ranawat

. Preoperative outcome scores are predictive of achieving the minimal clinically important difference after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(3):612-619.

38.

Ogawa

Matsumoto

Ogawa

Takeuchi

Akiyama

. Preoperative varus laxity correlates with overcorrection in medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136(10):1337-1342.

39.

Park

Shin

. Minimal clinically important differences and correlating factors for the Rowe score and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score after arthroscopic stabilization surgery for anterior shoulder instability. Arthroscopy. 2019;35(1):54-59.

40.

Quintana

Escobar

Arostegui

, et al. Health-related quality of life and appropriateness of knee or hip joint replacement. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(2):220-226.

41.

Sabzevari

Ebrahimpour

Roudi

Kachooei

. High tibial osteotomy: a systematic review and current concept. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2016;4(3):204-212.

42.

Sohn

Koh

Kim

Kang

. What factors predict patient dissatisfaction after contemporary medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy? J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(2):318-324.

43.

Song

Bae

. Computer-assisted navigation in high tibial osteotomy. Clin Orthop Surg. 2016;8(4):349-357.

44.

Spahn

. Complications in high tibial (medial opening wedge) osteotomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;124(10):649-653.

45.

Sterett

Steadman

Huang

Matheny

Briggs

. Chondral resurfacing and high tibial osteotomy in the varus knee: survivorship analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(7):1420-1424.

46.

Turner

Schünemann

Griffith

, et al. Using the entire cohort in the receiver operating characteristic analysis maximizes precision of the minimal important difference. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(4):374-379.

47.

Webb

Dewan

Elson

. Functional results following high tibial osteotomy: a review of the literature. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018;28(4):555-563.

48.

Yang

Berdine

. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Southwest Respiratory and Critical Care Chronicles. 2017;5(19):34-36.

49.

Yoo

Park

Kim

. Does obesity affect clinical and radiological outcomes in minimally invasive total knee arthroplasty? Minimum 5-year follow-up of minimally invasive TKA in obese patients. Clin Orthop Surg. 2018;10(3):315-321.

50.

Youden

. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 1950;3(1):32-35.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.29 MB

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the WOMAC and Factors Related to Achievement of the MCID After Medial Opening Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy for Knee Osteoarthritis

Abstract

Background:

Purpose:

Study Design:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material