Abstract
Although well-accepted clinical practice guidelines exist for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI), little is known about the quality of diagnosis for PJI. The identification of quality gaps in the diagnosis of PJI would facilitate the development of care structures and processes to shorten time to diagnosis and reduce the significant morbidity, mortality, and economic burden associated with this condition. Hence, we sought to develop valid clinical quality measures to improve the timeliness and accuracy of PJI diagnosis. We convened a nine-member multidisciplinary national panel of PJI experts including orthopedic surgeons, infectious disease specialists, an emergency medicine physician, and a patient previously treated for PJI to review, discuss, and rate the validity of proposed measures using a modification of the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method. In total, 57 permutations of six proposed measures were rated. Populations considered to be at high enough risk for PJI that certain care processes should always be performed were identified by the panel. Among the proposed quality measures, the panel rated five as valid. These novel clinical quality measures could provide insight into care gaps in the diagnosis of PJI.