The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has finalized a landmark national policy to standardize and expand the collection and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This policy will be rolled out through phased implementation, beginning with voluntary reporting starting in 2023 and transitioning to mandatory reporting starting in 2025, which will be tied to hospital payment determinations in fiscal year 2028. The overarching goal of this policy is to gather meaningful pre- and postoperative PROM data directly from patients to enhance clinical care, shared decision-making, and quality measurement for these common elective procedures. This national initiative underscores the value of incorporating patient perspectives and priorities into assessments of surgical care quality. For orthopaedic surgeons and hospitals, participating in the initial voluntary reporting period provides an opportunity to integrate PROM collection into clinical workflows and to leverage these data to improve patient care. The achievement of robust PROM response rates and a strong performance on the underlying THA/TKA Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measure may have increasing relevance as payment models shift toward value-based care. The aim of the present forum was to provide an in-depth review of this new CMS policy and key details regarding required PROM instruments, data-collection time frames, and other specifications that surgical teams should understand as they prepare for implementation. The goal was to equip orthopaedic surgeons with actionable information as they embark on this new era of national PROM collection and reporting.

Update: This article was updated on May 1, 2024 because of a previous error, which was discovered after the preliminary version of the article was posted online. The byline that had read “Ahmed K. Emara, MD¹*, Ignacio Pasqualini, MD¹*, Alison K. Klika, MS¹, Melissa N. Orr, BS¹, Pedro J. Rullán, MD¹, Nicolas S. Piuzzi, MD¹, and the Cleveland Clinic Arthroplasty Group†” now reads “Ahmed K. Emara, MD¹*, Ignacio Pasqualini, MD¹*, Yuxuan Jin, MS¹, Alison K. Klika, MS¹, Melissa N. Orr, BS¹, Pedro J. Rullán, MD¹, Nicolas S. Piuzzi, MD¹, and the Cleveland Clinic Arthroplasty Group†”. Background: Literature-reported minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for patient-reported outcome measures demonstrate marked variability. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), MCID, and PASS thresholds for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain subdomain, Physical Function Short Form (PS), and Joint Replacement (JR) among patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: A prospective cohort of 6,778 patients who underwent primary TKA was analyzed. Overall, 1-year follow-up was completed by 5,316 patients for the KOOS Pain, 5,018 patients for the KOOS PS, and 4,033 patients for the KOOS JR. A total of 5,186 patients had an OA diagnosis; this group had an average age of 67.0 years and was 59.9% female and 80.4% White. Diagnosis-specific MDCs and MCIDs were estimated with use of a distribution-based approach. PASS values were estimated with use of an anchor-based approach, which corresponded to a response to a satisfaction question at 1 year postoperatively. Results: The MCID thresholds for the OA group were 7.9 for the KOOS Pain, 8.0 for the KOOS PS, and 6.7 for the KOOS JR. A high percentage of patients achieved the MCID threshold for each outcome measure (KOOS Pain, 95%; KOOS PS, 88%; and KOOS JR, 94%). The MDC 80% to 95% confidence intervals ranged from 9.1 to 14.0 for the KOOS Pain, 9.2 to 14.1 for the KOOS PS, and 7.7 to 11.8 for the KOOS JR. The PASS thresholds for the OA group were 77.7 for the KOOS Pain (achieved by 73% of patients), 70.3 for the KOOS PS (achieved by 68% of patients), and 70.7 for the KOOS JR (achieved by 70% of patients). Conclusions: The present study provided useful MCID, MDC, and PASS thresholds for the KOOS Pain, PS, and JR for patients with OA. The diagnosis-specific metrics established herein can serve as benchmarks for clinically meaningful postoperative improvement. Future research and quality assessments should utilize these OA-specific thresholds when evaluating outcomes following TKA. Doing so will enable more accurate determinations of operative success and improvements in patient-centered care. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: With the upcoming U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2027 policy for mandatory reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for total hip or knee arthroplasty (THA or TKA), it is important to evaluate the resources required to achieve adequate PROM collection and reporting at a clinically relevant rate of follow-up. This study aimed to (1) determine follow-up rates for 1-year PROMs when the follow-up was conducted with active methods (attempted contact by staff) and passive (automated) methods, and (2) evaluate factors associated with higher odds of requiring active follow-up or being lost to follow-up following THA or TKA. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing primary elective THA (n = 7,436) or TKA (n = 10,119) between January 2016 and December 2020 at a single institution were included. The primary outcome was the response rate achieved with active and passive follow-up methods at our institution. Patient characteristics, health-care utilization parameters, PROM values, and patient satisfaction were compared between follow-up methods. Results: Passive and active measures were successful for 38% (2,859) and 40% (3,004) of the THA cohort, respectively, while 21% (1,573) were lost to follow-up. Similarly, passive and active measures were successful for 40% (4,001) and 41% (4,161) of the TKA cohort, respectively, while 20% (2,037) were lost to follow-up. Younger age, male sex, Black or another non-White race, fewer years of education, smoking, Medicare or Medicaid insurance, and specific baseline PROM phenotypes (i.e., with scores in the lower half for pain, function, and/or mental health) were associated with loss to follow-up. Older age, male sex, Black race, and a residence with a higher Area Deprivation Index were associated with requiring active follow-up. Conclusions: One of 5 patients were lost to follow-up despite active and passive measures following THA or TKA. These patients were more likely to be younger, be male, be of Black or another non-White race, have fewer years of education, be a smoker, have Medicaid insurance, and have specific baseline PROM phenotypes. Innovative strategies aimed at targeting individuals with these baseline characteristics may help raise the bar and increase follow-up while mitigating costs after total joint arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

» Arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the new formation of excessive scar tissue that results in limited ROM, pain, and functional deficits. » The diagnosis of arthrofibrosis is based on the patient's history, clinical examination, absence of alternative diagnoses from diagnostic testing, and operative findings. Imaging is helpful in ruling out specific causes of stiffness after TKA. A biopsy is not indicated, and no biomarkers of arthrofibrosis exist. » Arthrofibrosis pathophysiology is multifactorial and related to aberrant activation and proliferation of myofibroblasts that primarily deposit type I collagen in response to a proinflammatory environment. Transforming growth factor-beta signaling is the best established pathway involved in arthrofibrosis after TKA. » Management includes both nonoperative and operative modalities. Physical therapy is most used while revision arthroplasty is typically reserved as a last resort. Additional investigation into specific pathophysiologic mechanisms can better inform targeted therapeutics.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is often used to surgically address massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCT) without arthritis. The impact of prior attempted rotator cuff repair (RCR) on outcomes is unclear. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare functional outcomes, range of motion, and complications in patients with a MIRCT without arthritis who underwent RSA as a primary procedure versus after prior RCR. A systematic review was performed on RSA performed for a MIRCT. The search was conducted February to March of 2022 using the MEDLINE database. Patient reported outcome measures (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and complications were extracted. These outcomes were weighted and analyzed based on whether the reverse was performed as the primary procedure or following a prior RCR. Seven studies were included in the analysis, consisting of 343 cases in the primary RSA group and 95 cases in the prior RCR group, with a mean follow-up of 40.8 months. There were no demographic differences between cohorts. Postoperative PROs and ROM were comparable between groups, although the prior RCR group had a higher maximal percentage of improvement (MPI%) for the Constant-Murley Score and Simple Shoulder Test. There was a higher risk for complications (relative risk [RR] 6.26) and revisions (RR 3.91) in the prior RCR group. The most common complications were acromial stress fractures and prosthetic dislocation. Patients undergoing RSA for MIRCT following a prior RCR have functional outcomes that are largely comparable to those who have a primary RSA, but they may be at higher risk of complications and revision. IV.