CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE ON THE TREATMENT OF OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE (OAK CPG) AAOS Board Of...
-
Upload
cheyenne-pingrey -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE ON THE TREATMENT OF OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE (OAK CPG) AAOS Board Of...
CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE ON THE TREATMENT OF OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE (OAK CPG)
AAOS Board Of Directors WebinarAAOS Board Of Directors Webinar
1
Dial-in via telephone: Dial-in via telephone: (866) 394-4146(866) 394-4146
Access Code: Access Code: 34434932#34434932#
MONDAY, MAY 6 20137:30 – 8:30 PM CDT
Tonight’s Agenda
Rationale for AAOS EBM/Quality Rationale for AAOS EBM/Quality programsprograms
Brief description of AAOS Clinical Practice Brief description of AAOS Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) processesGuidelines (CPG) processes
Review of the “Clinical Practice Guideline Review of the “Clinical Practice Guideline on the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the on the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee” (OAK CPG)Knee” (OAK CPG)
2
Why does AAOS invest in EBM/Quality? Patient’s trust physiciansPatient’s trust physicians Decrease variationDecrease variation Synthesize orthopaedic literatureSynthesize orthopaedic literature Improve patient careImprove patient care
3
*Sinaiko and Rosenthal, AJMC, 2010
Who Will Define ‘Quality’ in Orthopaedics?
Goals of CPGs, AUCs
Improve quality of careImprove quality of care Reduce variationReduce variation Decrease inefficienciesDecrease inefficiencies Address rising costsAddress rising costs Define role of new Define role of new
technologies, procedurestechnologies, procedures
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
Biomedical MEDLINE Trials Diagnostic?
Med
ical
Art
icle
s p
er Y
ear
5,000?per day
1,500 per day
95 per day (>1/day
orthopaedic)
Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs)
““Systematically developed statements to Systematically developed statements to assist practitioner and patient decisions assist practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstancesspecific clinical circumstances””
--Institute of MedicineInstitute of Medicine
AAOS CPG Development Process
AAOS Evidence Rating SystemEvidence Rating> 2 HIGH quality studies Strong
1 HIGH or 2 Moderate quality studies
Moderate
1 Moderate or 2 LOW quality studies
Limited
1 LOW quality study , Contradictory studies, Lack of evidence (no studies)
Inconclusive
Expert Opinion (no studies) Consensus
IOM CPG Standards AAOS Guidelines vs. Proprietary Guidelines
IOM Standard AAOS GuidelinesProprietary Guidelines
1. Establishing transparency Yes No2. Management of Conflict of Interest Yes Unknown
3. Guideline development group composition
No – Currently no patient
representative Unknown4. Clinical practice guideline – systematic review intersection Yes Unknown5. Establishing evidence foundations for and rating strength of recommendations Yes Unknown6. Articulation of recommendations Yes Not easily available7. External review Yes Unknown8. Updating Yes Unknown
DAVID JEVSEVAR MD, MBAChair, Committee on Evidence-Based Quality and Value (EBQV)
KEVIN BOZIC MD, MBAChair, Council on Research and Quality (CORQ)
AAOS Clinical Practice AAOS Clinical Practice Guideline on the Treatment Guideline on the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Kneeof Osteoarthritis of the Knee
11
Revision / Update
12
April 2010 Nov 2012
Mar 2013
Summary of Peer Review Responses: 2013 OAK CPG
Overall, would you recommend these guidelines for Overall, would you recommend these guidelines for use in clinical practice? use in clinical practice?
13
N=16N=16
Public Comment
14
Specialty Societies (5)Specialty Societies (5) Individuals (29) Individuals (29)
(15 signed/ 14 anonymous) (15 signed/ 14 anonymous)
Industry (9) Industry (9) (8 signed/ 1 anonymous)(8 signed/ 1 anonymous)
Public Comments are published on the AAOS website with the Clinical Public Comments are published on the AAOS website with the Clinical Practice Guideline following BOD approval.Practice Guideline following BOD approval.
..
AAOS received 43 public comments representing:
This 2013 AAOS OAK CPG will update and replace the 2008 OAK CPG.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) evidence report, Quality (AHRQ) evidence report, “Treatment of Primary and Secondary “Treatment of Primary and Secondary Osteoarthritis of the Knee” Osteoarthritis of the Knee”
OARSI guidelines OARSI guidelines The Cochrane Database of Systematic The Cochrane Database of Systematic
Reviews (through February 22, 2008) Reviews (through February 22, 2008)
15
Evidence Base for 2008 CPG
Meta-analysis
When it is methodologically appropriate, When it is methodologically appropriate, the AAOS conducts a meta-analysis and the AAOS conducts a meta-analysis and determines clinical significance. determines clinical significance.
In this OAK CPG, meta-analysis was used In this OAK CPG, meta-analysis was used for these recommendations:for these recommendations: 3a, 6, 8 and 93a, 6, 8 and 9.. MCII and MID (*see MCII and MID (*see AAOS Now AAOS Now article))
16
Minimally Important Difference (MID) Meta-analysis Obtain proportion of patients that achieve Obtain proportion of patients that achieve
MIDMID ““Although we focus on disease specific Although we focus on disease specific
HRQL, the method can be applied to any HRQL, the method can be applied to any meta-analysis of RCTs that employ patient meta-analysis of RCTs that employ patient important continuous outcome measures.”important continuous outcome measures.”
17
Johnston et al. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2010, 8:116
Minimally Important Differences
18
MID MID 0.5 Threshold
0Favors Treatment Favors Placebo
Many Patients Gain Effect
The red line indicates 1 MCII 1
Some Patients Gain Effect
Small/Very Small # of Patients Gain Effect
RECOMMENDATION 3B
We are unable to recommend for or against We are unable to recommend for or against the use of the use of physical agents physical agents (including (including electrotherapeutic modalities) in patients with electrotherapeutic modalities) in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee.symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee.
Strength of Recommendation: Strength of Recommendation: InconclusiveInconclusive
19
RECOMMENDATION 3C
We are unable to recommend for or against We are unable to recommend for or against manual therapy manual therapy in patients with in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee.symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee.
Strength of Recommendation: Strength of Recommendation: InconclusiveInconclusive
20
RECOMMENDATION 9(before peer review) We recommend against using We recommend against using hyaluronic acid hyaluronic acid for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee. of the knee.
Strength of Recommendation: Strength of Recommendation: StrongStrong
21
RECOMMENDATION 9
We cannot recommend using We cannot recommend using hyaluronic acid hyaluronic acid for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis for patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee. of the knee.
Strength of Recommendation: Strength of Recommendation: StrongStrong
22
23
Rec 9 Figure 1: HA vs placebo (WOMAC and VAS pain)
24
Rec 9 Figure 2: HA WOMAC function
25
Rec 9 Figure 3: HA WOMAC stiffness
Minimally Important Differences
26
MCII Statistically Significant
0Favors Treatment Favors Placebo
Clinically Significant
The red line indicates the MCII
Minimally Important Differences
27
MCII Statistically Significant
0Favors Treatment Favors Placebo
Possibly Clinically Significant
Minimally Important Differences
28
MCII Statistically Significant
0Favors Treatment Favors Placebo
Not Clinically Significant
Minimally Important Differences
29
MCII Statistically Significant
0Favors Treatment Favors Placebo
Inconclusive
Rec 9 Hyaluronic Acid Versus Placebo: WOMAC Pain(original analysis)
30Figure 79
Rec 9 Hyaluronic Acid Versus Placebo: VAS Weight Bearing Pain (original analysis)
31Figure 80
The red line indicates the MCII
Rec 9 Hyaluronic Acid Versus Placebo: Function(original analysis)
32Figure 81
Rec 9 Hyaluronic Acid Versus Placebo: WOMAC Stiffness (original analysis)
33Figure 82
34
Week
Outcome 6 12 13 20 24 26 52
Lequesne index ● ●
VAS Pain ●
VAS weight bearing pain ●
WOMAC Function ●
WOMAC Stiffness ●
WOMAC Total ●
WOMAC Pain ● ● ● ●
Evaluator assessment of improvement ●
Patient assessment of improvement ●
Adverse events ● ● ●
Local adverse event ●
Severe adverse events ● ●
Treatment related adverse events ● ● ●
Figure 78. Results Summary: High Versus Low Molecular Weight HA
Key: ● =Not Significant;
●=Statistically Significant in Favor of High Molecular
Weight;
●=Possibly Clinically
Significant in Favor of HMW
Rec 9: High vs Low Molecular Weight HA (1of 3)
Individual Studies – Not Pooled results
Molecular Weight Comparison ALL OUTCOMES
6 million Da vs. 1-2.9 million Da NOT SIGNIFICANT
6 million DA vs. 2.2-2.7 million Da NOT SIGNIFICANT
6 million DA vs. 800kda-1200 Da NOT SIGNIFICANT
6 million DA vs 1 million Da NOT SIGNIFICANT
35
Rec 9: High vs Low Molecular Weight HA (2 of 3)
Molecular Weight Comparison OUTCOMES
All molecular weights >.75k DAvs. .5 -.75k DA
VAS pain NOT SIGNIFICANT
ICOAP-total, constant, and intermittent pain
NOT SIGNIFICANT
VAS weight bearing pain
NOT SIGNIFICANT
NOT SIGNIFICANT
WOMAC pain Possibly Clinically Significant
OTHER SOURCES
HYALURONIC ACID (Rec 9)HYALURONIC ACID (Rec 9)American College of RheumatologyAmerican College of RheumatologyOsteoarthritis Research Society InternationalOsteoarthritis Research Society InternationalAnnals of Internal MedicineAnnals of Internal Medicine
36
OARSI “The pooled effect size .. in 22 placebo controlled RCTs was .32 .. an asymmetric funnel plot and a positive Egger test suggested the possibility of publication bias.. and the identification of two unpublished trials with a pooled effect size of .07 [not statistically significant].. further suggested that the overall effect size might have been overestimated.” (p.147-8)
37
Zhang et al. OARSI recommendations for the management of hip and knee osteoarthritis, Part II: OARSI evidence-based, expert consensus guidelines. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage (2008); 16, 137-162; ©2008, Osteoarthritis Research Society International
http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1305532http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1305532
38
Viscosupplementation for Knee Osteoarthritis. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2012 Aug;157(3):I-36.
AUTHORS DISCOURAGE THE USE OF VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION FOR KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS.
Limitations Poor quality of many of the trials.
A major limitation is the poor methodological quality and reporting quality of many of the included trials, as previously described for a larger body of osteoarthritis trials (28, 124, 125).
Some trials (78, 80) showed unrealistically large effect sizes—2 to 3 times that of what would be expected for total joint replacement (10).
39
Viscosupplementation for Knee OsteoarthritisAnnals of Internal Medicine. 2012Aug; 157(3): I-36.
Funnel Plot
40
Viscosupplementation for Knee OsteoarthritisAnnals of Internal Medicine. 2012Aug; 157(3): I-36.
Effect Size
Pain
ACR – 2012 Recommendations for Osteoarthritis of Hand, Hip and Knee
41
No recommendationFor intraarticularhyaluronates
Arthritis Care & ResearchVol. 64, No.4, April 2012465-474 ©2012, ACR
Before CORQ
A A StrongStrong recommendation means that the recommendation means that the benefits of the recommended approach benefits of the recommended approach clearly exceed the potential harm (or that clearly exceed the potential harm (or that the potential harm clearly exceeds the the potential harm clearly exceeds the benefits in the case of a strong negative benefits in the case of a strong negative recommendation), and/or that the quality recommendation), and/or that the quality of the supporting evidence is high. of the supporting evidence is high.
42
After CORQ
A A StrongStrong recommendation means that recommendation means that the quality of the supporting evidence is the quality of the supporting evidence is high. A harms analysis on this high. A harms analysis on this recommendation was not performed. recommendation was not performed.
43
RECOMMENDATION 13We are unable to recommend for or againstWe are unable to recommend for or against
arthroscopic partial meniscectomy arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee with patients with osteoarthritis of the knee with a torn meniscus.a torn meniscus.
Strength of Recommendation: Strength of Recommendation: InconclusiveInconclusive
44
EBQV Committee Gregory A. Brown, MD, MBAGregory A. Brown, MD, MBA William B. Ericson, Jr. MDWilliam B. Ericson, Jr. MD Charles A. Reitman, MDCharles A. Reitman, MD Bruce Rougraff, MDBruce Rougraff, MD William O. Shaffer, MD, BSWilliam O. Shaffer, MD, BS Walter Stanwood, MDWalter Stanwood, MD Brent Graham, MDBrent Graham, MD Michael H. Heggeness, MDMichael H. Heggeness, MD Michael Warren Keith, MDMichael Warren Keith, MD Bruce Laron Smith, Jr. MDBruce Laron Smith, Jr. MD Charles T. Mehlman, DO, Charles T. Mehlman, DO,
MPHMPH
David S. Jevsevar, MD, David S. Jevsevar, MD, MBA -Chair, EBQVMBA -Chair, EBQV
James O. Sanders, MDJames O. Sanders, MD
AUC Section LeaderAUC Section Leader Michael J. Goldberg, MDMichael J. Goldberg, MD
GOC Section LeaderGOC Section Leader William Timothy Brox, MDWilliam Timothy Brox, MD James L. Carey, MDJames L. Carey, MD Robert H. Haralson, III, MD, Robert H. Haralson, III, MD,
MBAMBA William T. Obremskey, MD, William T. Obremskey, MD,
MPHMPH Robert H. Quinn, MDRobert H. Quinn, MD Nelson Fong SooHoo, MDNelson Fong SooHoo, MD
45
Staff Deborah Cummins, Deborah Cummins, PhD PhD Sharon Song, PhDSharon Song, PhD Patrick Donnelly, Patrick Donnelly, M.A.M.A. Leeaht Gross, MPHLeeaht Gross, MPH Kaitlyn SevarinoKaitlyn Sevarino
COMMENTS – QUESTIONSDISCUSSION
AAOS Clinical Practice Guideline on theAAOS Clinical Practice Guideline on the
Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the KneeTreatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee
46
THANK YOU