The OFAR Experiment: Barriers, Lessons, and Findings From an Orthopedic Patient Outcomes Database

Abstract

Category: Other; Ankle; Hindfoot; Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: As digital healthcare systems advance, patient reported outcomes (PRO) platforms offer an effective strategy for clinicians to evaluate patient relevant treatment outcomes. Initiated by AOFAS in 2018, the Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Outcomes Research (OFAR) Network was a multi-center surgical outcomes registry platform established to collect, aggregate, and report PRO data. OFAR included surgical information, patient demographics, and PRO instruments developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Due to high costs and competing technologies, OFAR data collection ended in 2020. Although OFAR did not achieve widespread and sustained use, a large number of patients were enrolled over the 2-year period. We hypothesized that each aggregated PRO metric improved at all post-operative time points compared to preoperative values. Methods: From 2018-2020, four sites and 10 orthopedic surgeons were approved and able to contribute patient data to the OFAR database. Enrolled patients completed a pre-operative survey and then post-operative surveys at 3-months, 6-months, and 12-months. Five PROMIS metrics were collected at each survey point, including Physical Function CAT (PF), Pain Intensity Short Form (PI), Pain Interference CAT, Global Health Short Form and Depression CAT. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographics and clinical characteristics of all individuals. Linear mixed models were used to test for differences in patient reported outcomes (PROs) across the study visits. The unstructured covariance structure was used to account for the repeated measures. After the OFAR closed to enrollment, all investigators of the OFAR consortium, including those who were not able to participate as a site, were surveyed to investigate the barriers they faced when launching OFAR at their site. Results: The final OFAR database includes 1,675 procedures performed at four institutions, with 1,126 having complete data for analysis. Ankle impingement (12%), ankle fracture/syndesmosis (11%), ankle arthritis (10%), and hallux valgus (9%) were the most common conditions among 28 unique conditions. The cumulative incidence of post-operative complications was 6.2% and the re- operation rate was 1.5%. Relative to the pre-operative visit, there was significant improvement in all metrics across post-operative time points (Table 1). The majority of OFAR consortium member sites (15 of 19) were unable to enroll patients in OFAR. The most common barriers noted included resistance from institutional EMR/IT or compliance teams, and institutional requirements to collect PROs through another platform. The majority of OFAR members (55%) indicated they would participate in a future low-cost, low-effort multi-center outcomes database. Conclusion: The OFAR database successfully collected patient outcomes data from multiple institutions. The resulting database also provided a comprehensive resource to answer targeted clinical questions about outcome predictors for common interventions. Barriers to participation in a multi-center registry more frequently emanated from the technologic or compliance constraints of hospital systems rather than individual providers. Increasing demand for PROs in practice, combined with the evolving technical landscape of greater automation and EHR interoperability will lead to more sustainable, affordable, and collaborative outcomes platforms. Institutional EMR and compliance barriers remain an important factor in advancing these important initiatives.