Editorial Commentary: Preoperative Exercise, Workers' Compensation, Diabetes, Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis, and Return to Sport Determine Patient Satisfaction After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed and used as the primary determinant of successful patient-centered results. The patient acceptable symptomatic state delineates an absolute value for PROMs indicating that patients are satisfied with their outcome. When this metric is use...
Saved in:
Published in: | Arthroscopy Vol. 37; no. 2; pp. 606 - 608 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
United States
01-02-2021
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed and used as the primary determinant of successful patient-centered results. The patient acceptable symptomatic state delineates an absolute value for PROMs indicating that patients are satisfied with their outcome. When this metric is used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, patients reach a satisfactory outcome at between 6 and 8 months postoperatively, and more than 90% reach a satisfactory outcome at 12 months. Preoperative variables such as preoperative exercise, Workers' Compensation, and diabetes impact patient outcomes, whereas preoperative PROMs and use of the anteromedial portal technique for femoral tunnel drilling have a limited impact on satisfaction. Iliotibial band tenodesis shows a large impact on satisfactory outcomes; however, this result may be affected by patient demographic issues (selection bias). Ultimately, a "satisfactory" outcome is a very general term and may not necessarily apply to active athletes desiring a return to competitive sport. Thus, the patient acceptable symptomatic state should be interpreted in combination with a surgeon's experience. Ultimately, the success of a surgical procedure could be determined, in large part, based on the patient's individual preoperative expectations. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | SourceType-Other Sources-1 content type line 63 ObjectType-Editorial-2 ObjectType-Commentary-1 |
ISSN: | 0749-8063 1526-3231 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.11.057 |