Search

Rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is a common and debilitating injury that impacts significantly on knee function and risks the development of degenerative arthritis. The outcome of ACL surgery is not monitored in Australia. The optimal treatment is unknown. Consequently, the identification of best practice in treating ACL is crucial to the development of improved outcomes. The Australian Knee Society (AKS) asked the Australian Orthopaedic Association (AOA) to consider establishing a national ACL registry. As a first step, a pilot study was undertaken by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) to test the hypothesis that collecting the required information in the Australian setting was possible. Surgeons completed an operative form which provided comprehensive information on the surgery undertaken. Patients provided pre- and post-operative questionnaires including the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Marx Activity Scale (MA Scale). The number of ACL procedures undertaken at each hospital during the recruitment period was compared against State Government Health Department separation data. A total of 802 patients were recruited from October 2011 to January 2013. The overall capture rate for surgeon-derived data was 99%, and the capture rate for the pre-operative patient questionnaire was 97.9%. At 6 months, patient-reported outcomes were obtained from 55% of patients, and 58.5% of patients at 12 months. When checked against State Government Health Department separation data, 31.3% of procedures undertaken at each study hospital were captured in the study. It is possible to collect surgeon-derived and pre-operative patient-reported data, following ACL reconstruction in Australia. The need to gain patient consent was a limiting factor to participation. When patients did consent to participate in the study, we were able to capture nearly 100% of surgical procedures. Patient consent would not be an issue in for a national registry where inclusion is automatic unless the patient wishes to opt out. The collection of post-operative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is more problematic, due to an insufficient proportion of individuals providing patient-reported outcomes. Alternative outcome measures are required for an ACL registry in Australia to be successfully implemented. Diagnostic, Level III.

Objectives: Report the findings of the AOANJRR ACL Registry Pilot pilot study to determine the feasibility of establishing an ACL Registry in Australia. Methods: The study involved both patient (pre and post-operative questionnaire) and surgeon (ACL operative data form) derived data collection. The Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) collected are the KOOS short form, a further two subscales taken from the KOOS long form (Quality of Life; and Function, Sports and Recreation Activities), and the Marx Activity Scale. A variety of approaches were used to maximize the collection of PROMs. The proportion of procedures provided by each hospital was determined by comparison to government separation data. Results: Nine hospitals nationwide were involved with the study, with 803 patients recruited. Collection of surgeon reported data achieved was 99.9%. Collection of PROMs data showed that 55% of patients notified at 6 months and 58.5% of patients notified at 12 months responded. The proportion of all ACL procedures undertaken at each hospital and included in the study varied considerably. Conclusion: The study has shown that it is possible to collect surgeon derived data for those patients recruited for the study. The collection of PROMs however is more problematic.