Patient-Reported Outcome Surveys for Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome Demonstrate Strong Correlations, High...

To determine the correlation between different patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements used to assess outcomes after arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) in a single cohort of patients.

Patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS (without dysplasia, arthritis, or joint hypermobility) were retrospectively analyzed from a prospectively collected cohort. PROs collected before surgery and at 2-year follow-up included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (HOOS) with subscales for symptoms, pain, activities of daily living (ADL), sport, and quality of life (QoL), and the physical and mental components of the Short Form-12 (SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS).

Three hundred patients with 2 years' follow-up (mean age 35.1 ± 11.3, BMI 24.7 ± 3.8, 52.7% female, median Tönnis grade 1) were identified. All patients underwent femoroplasty and labral repair. There was a strong correlation among nearly all the PRO surveys at 2-year follow-up, with the highest correlations identified between mHHS and HOOS-Pain (r = .86, P < .001) and mHHS and HOOS-ADL (r = .85, P < .001). Preoperative scores and the change from preoperative to postoperative scores demonstrated an overall moderate correlation between surveys. There was a consistently weak correlation between the SF-12 MCS and all other PROs. There were strong agreements (67%-77%) in the patients achieving minimal clinically important differences (MCID) for each PRO survey. All surveys except the SF-12 demonstrated a ceiling effect after surgery, with 13% to 43% of patients achieving the maximum score.

PRO surveys used for FAIS demonstrate strong correlations, especially in the evaluation of patients during the postoperative period. MCID for VAS, mHHS, and HOOS demonstrate strong agreement, whereas large ceiling effects were seen with the mHHS and HOOS. The results support a more efficient use of PRO scores while being able to accurately capture patient outcomes.

IV, retrospective case series.