Do Patients Accurately Represent Their Experiences After Hip and Knee Replacements?

Area of Science:

• Orthopedic Surgery
• Health Informatics
• Patient Outcomes Research

Background:

• Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used for healthcare auditing.
• Discrepancies may exist between patient-reported complications and medical record documentation.
• Understanding these differences is crucial for accurate healthcare assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate discrepancies between patient-reported complications via PROMs and those documented in medical records.
• To compare patient perception of complications with formal medical definitions post-arthroplasty.
• To assess the concordance of reported complications in elective hip and knee replacements.

Main Methods:

• Retrospective analysis of PROMs and corresponding medical records.
• Inclusion of patients undergoing elective primary total knee or hip replacement (April 2016 - March 2017).
• Categorization of complications into wound, urinary, readmission, and reoperation for comparison.

Main Results:

• A total of 54 patient records were analyzed.
• Overall positive predictive value was 0.47; negative predictive value was 0.91.
• Concordance rates varied: 70.4% for wound, 66.7% for urinary, 83.3% for readmission, and 96.3% for reoperation.

Conclusions:

• Significant discrepancies exist between PROMs-reported and medically documented complication rates.
• A notable disparity was observed between patient perception and the medical definition of postoperative complications.
• Enhanced patient education and empowerment are necessary for improved arthroplasty preparation and outcome reporting.