Introduction: The purpose of this study is to compare the utility and validity of the OrthoMiDaS (Orthopaedic Minimal Data Set) Episode of Care (OME) database with the current benchmark for recording procedural details, the operative note (OpNote), with regard to disease severity and risk factors for hip arthroscopy cases.
Methods: A convenience sample of the first 100 hip arthroscopy cases for labral tears done at our institution between February and August 2015 were selected for this study. Surgeons recorded procedural details within OME after each case. An individual blinded to the OME data performed a chart review of the OpNote and/or implant log and recorded the information in a separate REDCap database.
Results: OME demonstrated higher completion rates than the OpNote for important procedural details such as previous left and right hip surgery (P < 0.001), anchor type (P = 0.008), and labrum tear clockface variables (P < 0.001 for both). In addition, OME exhibited "near-perfect" agreement with the OpNote for several important procedural details such as surgical limb (Kappa = 1.000), suture configuration (Kappa = 0.982), repair type (Kappa = 0.947), tear clockface: from (Kappa = 0.949), and tear clockface: to (Kappa = 0.885). On average, surgeons took 117 seconds to complete data entry within OME.
Conclusion: The findings of this study validate the ability of OME to accurately and consistently capture important procedural details pertaining to arthroscopic hip surgery. Through the use of OME, high-quality standardized information can be captured and used to advance the field of hip arthroscopy by determining the clinically useful predictors of patient-reported outcome measures.