Aims. The aims of this study were to assess mapping models to predict the three-level version of EuroQoL five-dimension utility index (EQ-5D-3L) from the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and validate these before and after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. A retrospective cohort of 5,857 patients was used to create the prediction models, and a second cohort of 721 patients from a different centre was used to validate the models, all of whom underwent TKA. Patient characteristics, BMI, OKS, and EQ-5D-3L were collected preoperatively and one year postoperatively. Generalized linear regression was used to formulate the prediction models. Results. There were significant correlations between the OKS and EQ-5D-3L preoperatively (r = 0.68; p < 0.001) and postoperatively (r = 0.77; p < 0.001) and for the change in the scores (r = 0.61; p < 0.001). Three different models (preoperative, postoperative, and change) were created. There were no significant differences between the actual and predicted mean EQ-5D-3L utilities at any timepoint or for change in the scores (p > 0.090) in the validation cohort. There was a significant correlation between the actual and predicted EQ-5D-3L utilities preoperatively (r = 0.63; p < 0.001) and postoperatively (r = 0.77; p < 0.001) and for the change in the scores (r = 0.56; p < 0.001). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated that a lower utility was overestimated, and higher utility was underestimated. The individual predicted EQ-5D-3L that was within ± 0.05 and ± 0.010 (minimal clinically important difference (MCID)) of the actual EQ-5D-3L varied between 13% to 35% and 26% to 64%, respectively, according to timepoint assessed and change in the scores, but was not significantly different between the modelling and validation cohorts (p ≥ 0.148). Conclusion. The OKS can be used to estimate EQ-5D-3L. Predicted individual patient utility error beyond the MCID varied from one-third to two-thirds depending on timepoint assessed, but the mean for a cohort did not differ and could be employed for this purpose. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):573–581

Purpose. To examine the clinical characteristics of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty with a pre-operative Oxford Knee Score >34 (‘good’/‘excellent’), and assess the appropriateness of surgical intervention for this group. Background. In the current cost-constrained health economy, justification of surgical intervention is increasingly sought. As a validated disease-specific outcome measure, the pre-operative Oxford Knee Score (OKS) has been suggested as a possible threshold measurement in knee arthroplasty. However, contrary to expectations, analysis of pre-operative OKS in the joint registry population demonstrates a normal distribution curve with a sub-group of high-scoring patients. This suggests that either the baseline OKS does not accurately define surgical threshold, or that patients with a high OKS are inappropriately having knee replacements. Methods. Retrospective case-note review of patients listed for primary Knee arthroplasty (n=1058), with a preoperative OKS >34 (n=44). Data was extracted, with analysis of referral criteria, clinical presentation, radiological changes (Kellgren-Lawrence), and content analysis of the appropriateness of knee arthroplasty. Age and gender differences were compared between OKS<34 and OKS>34 groups. Results. No significant difference was observed in age between groups. Gender distribution in the OKS>34 group was 2:1(M:F) compared with 1:1.3 (M:F) in the OKS<34 group. Once listed for surgery, 81.8% proceeded with arthroplasty, while 18.2% cancelled due to improvement in symptoms. A contralateral knee arthroplasty had been performed in 10(22.8%), and previous arthroscopy in 15(34.1%) cases. Advanced radiological changes were observed in 33(75.0%) cases. Based on available information, surgery was deemed appropriate in 54.5%, questionable 15.9%, and perhaps inappropriate in 4.5% cases (insufficient information for categorisation 25.0%). Conclusion. A small group of patients deemed appropriate for knee arthroplasty present with high pre-operative OKS. Pre-operative OKS appears insensitive to the individual factors involved in defining treatment allocation, and further assessment is required. Introduction of pre-operative threshold scores cannot be currently recommended for knee arthroplasty

Aim: To assess the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) for the assessment of soft tissue knee pathology?. Method: In a prospective study, we compared the OKS against the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC 2000) and the Lysholm Scores (Lys). We also assessed the OKS with retrograde and antegrade (as currently used in Oxford) numbering. All patients completed 3 questionnaires stating which was the simplest from their perspective. We recruited 73 patients from the orthopaedic and physiotherapy clinics, meeting the following criteria:. Results: Linear regression analysis revealed no significant difference between all 3 scores (R. 2. =0.7823, P< 0.0001). The OKS correlated best with the IKDC (r=0.7483, Fig1), but less so with the Lys (r=0.3278, Fig2). The reversed OKS did not correlate as well (R. 2. = 0.2603) with either the IKDC (r= −0.2978) or the Lys (r= −0.2586). ANOVA showed the OKS to be significantly easier than Lys to complete (p< 0.0001), but not significantly easier than IKDC (p> 0.05). Conclusion: The OKS is patient friendly and reliable in assessing soft tissue knee injury. This is particularly useful if the OKS is already in use within a department for measurement of severity of degenerative disease

Source of the study: University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand and University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a 12-item questionnaire used to track knee arthroplasty outcomes. Validation of such patient reported outcome measures is typically anchored to a single question based on patient ‘satisfaction’, however risk of subsequent revision surgery is also an important outcome measure. The OKS can predict subsequent revision risk within two years, however it is not known which item(s) are the strongest predictors. Our aim was to identify which questions were most relevant in the prediction of subsequent knee arthroplasty revision risk. . All primary TKAs (n=27,708) and UKAs (n=8,415) captured by the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1999 and 2019 with at least one OKS response at six months, five years or ten years post-surgery were included. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were used to assess prediction models at six months, five years and ten years. Q1 ‘overall pain’ was the strongest predictor of revision within two years (TKA: 6 months, odds ratio (OR) 1.37; 5 years, OR 1.80; 10 years, OR 1.43; UKA: 6 months, OR 1.32; 5 years, OR 2.88; 10 years, OR 1.85; all p<0.05). A reduced model with just three questions (Q1, Q6 ‘limping when walking’, Q10 ‘knee giving way’) showed comparable or better diagnostic ability with the full OKS (area under the curve (AUC): TKA: 6 months, 0.77 vs. 0.76; 5 years, 0.78 vs. 0.75; 10 years, 0.76 vs. 0.73; UKA: 6 months, 0.80 vs. 0.78; 5 years: 0.81 vs. 0.77; 10 years, 0.80 vs. 0.77). The three questions on overall knee pain, limping when walking, and knee ‘giving way’ were the strongest predictors of subsequent revision within two years. Attention to the responses for these three key questions during follow-up may allow for prompt identification of patients most at risk of revision

Aim. To assess the efficacy and ease of use of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in soft tissue knee pathology. Method. In a prospective study, we compared the OKS against the International Knee Documentation Committee 2000 (IKDC) and the Lysholm Scores (Lys). We also assessed the OKS with retrograde (Reversed OKS: 48=worst symptoms, 0=asymptomatic) and antegrade (as currently used in Oxford) numbering. All patients completed 3 questionnaires (OKS, Lys, and IKDC, or RevOKS, Lys, and IKDC) stating which was the simplest from their perspective. We recruited 93 patients from the orthopaedic and physiotherapy clinics. All patients between the ages of 15 and 45 with soft tissue knee derangements, such as ligamentous, and meniscal injuries were included. Exclusions were made in patients with degenerative and/or inflammatory arthritidis. Patients who had sustained bony injuries or underwent bony surgery were also excluded. Results. The distribution of the soft tissue injuries was: Meniscal tears (35%), anterior cruciate ligament injuries (23%), anterior knee pain (22%), other injuries (12%), and collateral ligament damage (8%). Linear regression analysis revealed no significant difference between all 3 scores (R squared=0.7823, P<0.0001). The OKS correlated best with the IKDC (r=0.7483), but less so with the Lys (r=0.3278). The reversed OKS did not correlate as well (R squared= 0.2603) with either the IKDC (r= -0.2978) or the Lys (r=-0.2586). ANOVA showed the OKS to be significantly easier than Lys to complete (p<0.0001), but not significantly easier than IKDC (p>0.05). Conclusion. The OKS is patient friendly and reliable in assessing soft tissue knee injury. This is particularly useful if the OKS is already in use within a department for assessment of degenerative disease. The Oxford Knee score should be used in an antegrade fashion (with a score of 48/48 corresponding to maximum symptoms) to give the best results in objective assessment

A long surgical procedure length has been well associated with worse clinical outcomes, also in an economic climate where in the theatre, time is money, surgical procedures are done very rapidly. Few studies have documented the clinical outcomes of procedure speed. Using the New Zealand Registry we reviewed the operation time of 41,560 primary knee joint replacements. These were split into groups of time slots for the surgery from less than 40 minutes, 40–59, 60–89, 90–119, 120–179 and greater than 180mins. This was referenced to the oxford knee scores obtained and the revision rate. For operations done in less than 40 or greater than 180 minutes, the oxford knee score was lower by 5 years. The revision rate was also increased in these same groups. Operations done in greater than 180 minutes are generally the more complex non-osteoarthrtic and tumour cases and have a higher revision rate reflecting their complexity. Procedures done less than 40 minutes are more straight forward, but there is a relationship shown between this speed and revision rate and poorer outcome. The cause is likely multifactorial, but begs the question, does speed kill?

Abstract

Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) can be completed using paper and postal services (pPROMS) or via computer, tablet or smartphone (ePROMs). We have investigated whether there are differences in scores depending on the method of PROMs acquisition for the Oxford Knee (OKS) and the EQ-5D scores, at one and two years post operatively.

Patient demographics, mode of preferred data collection and pre-and post-operative PROMs for Total Knee Replacements (TKRs) performed between 1st January 2018 and 31st December 2018 were collected.

During the study period, 1573 patients underwent TKRs. The average OHS and EQ-5D pre-operatively scores was 19.47 and 0.40 respectively. 71.46% opted to undertake post-operative questionnaires using ePROMs. The remaining 28.54% opted for pPROMS. The one and two-year OHS for ePROMS patients increased to 37.64 and 39.76 while the OHS scores for pPROMS patients were 35.71 and 36.83. At the one and two-year post-operative time intervals, a Mann-Whitney test showed statistical significance between the modes of administration for OHS (P-Value = 0.044 and 0.01 respectively). The one and two-year EQ-5D for ePROMS patients increased to 0.76 and 0.78 while the EQ-5D scores for pPROMS patients were 0.73 and 0.76. The P-Value for Mann-Whitney tests comparing the modes of administration for EQ-5D were 0.04 and 0.07 respectively.

There is no agreed mode of PROMs data acquisition for the OKS and EQ-5D Scores. While we have demonstrated an apparent difference in scores depending on the mode of administration, further work is required to establish the influence of potentially confounding factors.

Purpose. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) is a validated and widely used PROM that has been successfully used in assessing the outcome of knee arthroplasty (KA). It has been adopted as the nationally agreed outcome measure for this procedure and is now routinely collected. Increasingly, it is being used on an individual patient basis as a pre-operative measure of osteoarthritis and the need for joint replacement, despite not being validated for this use. The aim of this paper is to present evidence that challenges this new role for the OKS. Method. We have analysed pre-operative and post-operative OKS data from 3 large cohorts all undergoing KA, totalling over 3000 patients. In addition we have correlated the OKS to patient satisfaction scores. We have validated our findings using data published from the UK NJR. Results. Our data confirms of the effectiveness of the OKS in assessing the results of KA in populations of patients. Nearly all patients who undergo KA have an improvement in their OKS, regardless of the pre-operative score. However, we have found that the pre-operative OKS cannot predict a poor outcome after KA and patients with the best pre-operative OKS have the best outcome as measured by patient satisfaction. Conclusion. These data suggest that the OKS remains an excellent tool for assessing the outcome of knee arthroplasty in cohorts of patients, but further evidence is required of its validity for decisions regarding individual patients. Great care should be taken in using the pre-operative OKS to predict outcome after KA and its use in ranking patients need for surgery cannot be supported

INTRODUCTION: The American Knee Society score (AKSS) and the Oxford Knee score (OKS) are widely used health outcome measures for total knee replacements. The AKSS is a surgeon-assessed, variable weighted knee score. The OKS is a patient assessed equally weighted score. Our aim was to evaluate whether patient self assessment is a viable alternative to clinical review and whether it can provide enough information to identify which patient would require a clinic visit. As there had been no previous studies correlating the two scoring systems, we investigated whether a correlation exists between the two scores at 2, 5 and 10 year periods. A correlation would allow us to determine what OKS value would achieve 90% sensitivity in identifying patients requiring clinical review at the above time points. This strategy would reduce the number of clinical visits required and its associated cost. METHODS: We reviewed the data gathered prospectively from January 2000 to April 2006. All patients were part of an ongoing multi-surgeon single institution Knee Arthroplasty Outcome Programme. Preoperative, 2, 5 and 10 year post-operative OKS and AKSS were gathered from different cohorts. This method of comparison has been validated by previous publications. The scores were then analyzed using the Pearson correlation and linear regression. Different OKS values were analyzed for sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: 175 patients completed both the OKS and AKSS questionnaires preoperatively. 312 completed both scores at 2 years; 124 at 5 years and 57 patients at 10 years. The mean OKS, and the two AKSS components, the Knee score and Functional score improved significantly 2 years postoperatively when compared to their preoperative values. The Functional score deteriorated significantly from 5 to 10 years (p< 0.0001). There was good correlation between the OKS and the Knee score and Functional score at 2 years and a moderate correlation at 5 to 10 years. OKS > 24 showed more than 90 % sensitivity in identifying poor Knee scores in the 2, 5 and 10 year periods. CONCLUSION: In this study, the good correlation of OKS and AKSS at 2-years suggests that postal Oxford questionnaire is sufficient in following up patients in the short term after total knee replacement. However, the moderate correlation at 5 and 10 years suggests that clinical evaluation is necessary. We recommend that at 2 years, all patients complete an OKS questionnaire and if this is above 24, a clinical evaluation maybe required. Using this OKS value as a screening technique would allow a reduction of up to 50% in clinic visits and outpatient costs at the 2 year follow-up. This reduction is not as great at the 5 and 10 year periods. At these time periods, we recommend a clinical follow-up

Aims. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate machine-learning-based computerized adaptive tests (CATs) for the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and its subscales. Methods. We developed CAT algorithms for the OHS, OKS, OSS, overall OES, and each of the OES subscales, using responses to the full-length questionnaires and a machine-learning technique called regression tree learning. The algorithms were evaluated through a series of simulation studies, in which they aimed to predict respondents’ full-length questionnaire scores from only a selection of their item responses. In each case, the total number of items used by the CAT algorithm was recorded and CAT scores were compared to full-length questionnaire scores by mean, SD, score distribution plots, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation (ICC), and the Bland-Altman method. Differences between CAT scores and full-length questionnaire scores were contextualized through comparison to the instruments’ minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Results. The CAT algorithms accurately estimated 12-item questionnaire scores from between four and nine items. Scores followed a very similar distribution between CAT and full-length assessments, with the mean score difference ranging from 0.03 to 0.26 out of 48 points. Pearson’s correlation coefficient and ICC were 0.98 for each 12-item scale and 0.95 or higher for the OES subscales. In over 95% of cases, a patient’s CAT score was within five points of the full-length questionnaire score for each 12-item questionnaire. Conclusion. Oxford Hip Score, Oxford Knee Score, Oxford Shoulder Score, and Oxford Elbow Score (including separate subscale scores) CATs all markedly reduce the burden of items to be completed without sacrificing score accuracy. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):786–794

Aims. To map the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and High Activity Arthroplasty Score (HAAS) items to a common scale, and to investigate the psychometric properties of this new scale for the measurement of knee health. Methods. Patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) data measuring knee health were obtained from the NHS PROMs dataset and Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial (TOPKAT). Assumptions for common scale modelling were tested. A graded response model (fitted to OKS item responses in the NHS PROMs dataset) was used as an anchor to calibrate paired HAAS items from the TOPKAT dataset. Information curves for the combined OKS-HAAS model were plotted. Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare common scale scores derived from OKS and HAAS items. A conversion table was developed to map between HAAS, OKS, and the common scale. Results. We included 3,329 response sets from 528 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty. These generally met the assumptions of unidimensionality, monotonicity, local independence, and measurement invariance. The HAAS items provided more information than OKS items at high levels of knee health. Combining both instruments resulted in higher test-level information than either instrument alone. The mean error between common scale scores derived from the OKS and HAAS was 0.29 logits. Conclusion. The common scale allowed more precise measurement of knee health than use of either the OKS or HAAS individually. These techniques for mapping PROM instruments may be useful for the standardization of outcome reporting, and pooling results across studies that use either PROM in individual-patient meta-analysis. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(10):624–635

Aims. The metabolic equivalent of task (MET) score examines patient performance in relation to energy expenditure before and after knee arthroplasty. This study assesses its use in a knee arthroplasty population in comparison with the widely used Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and EuroQol five-dimension index (EQ-5D), which are reported to be limited by ceiling effects. Methods. A total of 116 patients with OKS, EQ-5D, and MET scores before, and at least six months following, unilateral primary knee arthroplasty were identified from a database. Procedures were performed by a single surgeon between 2014 and 2019 consecutively. Scores were analyzed for normality, skewness, kurtosis, and the presence of ceiling/floor effects. Concurrent validity between the MET score, OKS, and EQ-5D was assessed using Spearman’s rank. Results. Postoperatively the OKS and EQ-5D demonstrated negative skews in distribution, with high kurtosis at six months and one year. The OKS demonstrated a ceiling effect at one year (15.7%) postoperatively. The EQ-5D demonstrated a ceiling effect at six months (30.2%) and one year (39.8%) postoperatively. The MET score did not demonstrate a skewed distribution or ceiling effect either at six months or one year postoperatively. Weak-moderate correlations were noted between the MET score and conventional scores at six months and one year postoperatively. Conclusion. In contrast to the OKS and EQ-5D, the MET score was normally distributed postoperatively with no ceiling effect. It is worth consideration as an arthroplasty outcome measure, particularly for patients with high expectations. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(3):129–137

Aims. The primary objective of this registry-based study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of cementless and cemented medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) during the first postoperative year. The secondary objective was to assess one- and three-year implant survival of both fixation techniques. Methods. We analyzed 10,862 cementless and 7,917 cemented UKA cases enrolled in the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry, operated between 2017 and 2021. Pre- to postoperative change in outcomes at six and 12 months’ follow-up were compared using mixed model analyses. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models were applied to quantify differences in implant survival. Adjustments were made for patient-specific variables and annual hospital volume. Results. Change from baseline in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and activity-related pain was comparable between groups. Adjustment for covariates demonstrated a minimally greater decrease in rest-related pain in the cemented group (β = -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.16 to -0.01)). Cementless fixation was associated with a higher probability of achieving an excellent OKS outcome (> 41 points) (adjusted odds ratio 1.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 1.3)). The likelihood of one-year implant survival was greater for cemented implants (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.71)), with higher revision rates for periprosthetic fractures of cementless implants. During two to three years’ follow-up, the likelihood of implant survival was non-significantly greater for cementless UKA (adjusted HR 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.04)), primarily due to increased revision rates for tibial loosening of cemented implants. Conclusion. Cementless and cemented medial UKA led to comparable improvement in physical function and pain reduction during the initial postoperative year, albeit with a greater likelihood of achieving excellent OKS outcomes after cementless UKA. Anticipated differences in early physical function and pain should not be a decisive factor in the choice of fixation technique. However, surgeons should consider the differences in short- and long-term implant survival when deciding which implant to use. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(5):401–410

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe and compare joint-specific and generic health-related quality of life outcomes of the first versus second knee in patients undergoing staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) for osteoarthritis. Methods. This retrospective cohort study used Australian national arthroplasty registry data from January 2013 to January 2021 to identify participants who underwent elective staged BTKA with six to 24 months between procedures. The primary outcome was Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at six months postoperatively for the first TKA compared to the second TKA, adjusted for age and sex. Secondary outcomes compared six-month EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) domain scores, EQ-5D index scores, and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) between knees at six months postoperatively. Results. The cohort included 635 participants (1,270 primary procedures). Preoperative scores were worse in the first knee compared to the second for all instruments; however, comparing the first knee at six months postoperatively with the second knee at six months postoperatively, the mean between-knee difference was minimal for OKS (-0.8 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.4 to -0.2), EQ-VAS (3.3; 95% CI 1.9 to 4.7), and EQ-5D index (0.09 points; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.12). Outcomes for the EQ-5D-5L domains ‘mobility’, ‘usual activities’, and ‘pain/discomfort’ were better following the second TKA. Conclusion. At six months postoperatively, there were no clinically meaningful differences between the first and second TKA in either the joint-specific or overall generic health-related quality of life outcomes. However, individual domain scores assessing mobility, pain, and usual activities were notably higher after the second TKA, likely reflecting the cumulative improvement in quality of life after both knees have been replaced. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):202–209

Aims. This prospective study reports longitudinal, within-patient, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) over a 15-year period following cemented single radius total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Secondary aims included reporting PROMs trajectory, 15-year implant survival, and patient attrition from follow-up. Methods. From 2006 to 2007, 462 consecutive cemented cruciate-retaining Triathlon TKAs were implanted in 426 patients (mean age 69 years (21 to 89); 290 (62.7%) female). PROMs (12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and satisfaction) were assessed preoperatively and at one, five, ten, and 15 years. Kaplan-Meier survival and univariate analysis were performed. Results. At 15 years, 28 patients were lost to follow-up (6.1%) and 221 patients (51.9%) had died, with the mean age of the remaining cohort reducing by four years. PROMs response rates among surviving patients were: one-year 63%; five-year 72%; ten-year 94%; and 15-year 59%. OKS and SF-12 scores changed significantly over 15 years (p < 0.001). The mean improvement in OKS was 18.8 (95% confidence (CI) 16.7 to 19.0) at one year. OKS peaked at five years (median 43 years) declining thereafter (p < 0.001), though at 15 years it remained 17.5 better than preoperatively. Age and sex did not alter this trajectory. A quarter of patients experienced a clinically significant decline (≥ 7) in OKS from five to ten years and from ten to 15 years. The SF-12 physical component score displayed a similar trajectory, peaking at one year (p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was 88% at one, five, and ten years, and 94% at 15 years. In all, 15-year Kaplan-Meier survival was 97.6% (95% CI 96.0% to 99.2%) for any revision, and 98.9% (95% CI 97.9% to 99.9%) for aseptic revision. Conclusion. Improvements in PROMs were significant and maintained following single radius TKA, with OKS peaking at five years, and generic physical health peaking at one year. Patient satisfaction remained high at 15 years, at which point 2.4% had been revised. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(10):808–816

Aims. Treatment of end-stage anteromedial osteoarthritis (AMOA) of the knee is commonly approached using one of two surgical strategies: medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In this study we aim to investigate if there is any difference in outcome for patients undergoing UKA or TKA, when treated by high-volume surgeons, in high-volume centres, using two different clinical guidelines. The two strategies are ‘UKA whenever possible’ vs TKA for all patients with AMOA. Methods. A total of 501 consecutive AMOA patients (301 UKA) operated on between 2013 to 2016 in two high-volume centres were included. Centre One employed clinical guidelines for the treatment of AMOA allowing either UKA or TKA, but encouraged UKA wherever possible. Centre Two used clinical guidelines that treated all patients with a TKA, regardless of wear pattern. TKA patients were included if they had isolated AMOA on preoperative radiographs. Data were collected from both centres’ local databases. The primary outcome measure was change in Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and the proportion of patients achieving the patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) at one-year follow-up. The data were 1:1 propensity score matched before regression models were used to investigate potential differences. Results. The matched cohort included 400 patients (mean age 67 years (SD 9.55), 213 (53%) female, mean BMI 30.2 kg/m. 2. , 337 (84%) American Society of Anesthesiologists grade ≤ 2). We found a mean adjusted difference in change score of 3.02 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 4.63; p < 0.001) and a significantly larger likeliness of achieving PASS (odds ratio 3.67 (95% CI 1.73 to 8.45); p = 0.001) both in favour of the UKA strategy. Conclusion. UKA and TKA are both good strategies for treating end-stage AMOA. However, when compared as a strategy, UKA achieved larger improvements in OKS, and were more likely to reach the PASS value at one-year follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(5):441–447

Aims. This study compared patient-reported outcomes of three total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs from one manufacturer: one cruciate-retaining (CR) design, and two cruciate-sacrificing designs, anterior-stabilized (AS) and posterior-stabilized (PS). Methods. Patients scheduled for primary TKA were included in a single-centre, prospective, three-armed, blinded randomized trial (n = 216; 72 per group). After intraoperative confirmation of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) integrity, patients were randomly allocated to receive a CR, AS, or PS design from the same TKA system. Insertion of an AS or PS design required PCL resection. The primary outcome was the mean score of all five subscales of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at two-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included all KOOS subscales, Oxford Knee Score, EuroQol five-dimension health questionnaire, EuroQol visual analogue scale, range of motion (ROM), and willingness to undergo the operation again. Patient satisfaction was also assessed. Results. Patients reported similar levels of pain, function, satisfaction, and general health regardless of the prosthetic design they received. Mean maximal flexion (129° (95% confidence interval (CI) 127° to 131°) was greater in the PS group than in the CR (120° (95% CI 121° to 124°)) and AS groups (122° (95% CI 120° to 124°)). Conclusion. Despite differences in design and constraint, CR, AS, and PS designs from a single TKA system resulted in no differences in patient-reported outcomes at two-year follow-up. PS patients had statistically better ROM, but the clinical significance of this finding is unclear. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(12):1271–1278

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence and patterns of neuropathic pain over one year in a cohort of patients with chronic post-surgical pain at three months following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods. Between 2016 and 2019, 363 patients with troublesome pain, defined as a score of ≤ 14 on the Oxford Knee Score pain subscale, three months after TKA from eight UK NHS hospitals, were recruited into the Support and Treatment After Replacement (STAR) clinical trial. Self-reported neuropathic pain and postoperative pain was assessed at three, nine, and 15 months after surgery using the painDETECT and Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaires collected by postal survey. Results. Symptoms of neuropathic pain were common among patients reporting chronic pain at three months post-TKA, with half reporting neuropathic pain on painDETECT (191/363; 53%) and 74% (267/359) on DN4. Of those with neuropathic pain at three months, half continued to have symptoms over the next 12 months (148/262; 56%), one-quarter had improved (67/262; 26%), and for one-tenth their neuropathic symptoms fluctuated over time (24/262; 9%). However, a subgroup of participants reported new, late onset neuropathic symptoms (23/262; 9%). Prevalence of neuropathic symptoms was similar between the screening tools when the lower cut-off painDETECT score (≥ 13) was applied. Overall, mean neuropathic pain scores improved between three and 15 months after TKA. Conclusion. Neuropathic pain is common in patients with chronic pain at three months after TKA. Although neuropathic symptoms improved over time, up to half continued to report painful neuropathic symptoms at 15 months after TKA. Postoperative care should include screening, assessment, and treatment of neuropathic pain in patients with early chronic postoperative pain after TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(6):582–588

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine satisfaction rates after hip and knee arthroplasty in patients who did not respond to postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), characteristics of non-responders, and contact preferences to maximize response rates. Methods. A prospective cohort study of patients planned to undergo hip arthroplasty (n = 713) and knee arthroplasty (n = 737) at a UK university teaching hospital who had completed preoperative PROMs questionnaires, including the EuroQol five-dimension health-related quality of life score, and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Follow-up questionnaires were sent by post at one year, including satisfaction scoring. Attempts were made to contact patients who did not initially respond. Univariate, logistic regression, and receiver operator curve analysis was performed. Results. At one year, 667 hip patients (93.5%) and 685 knee patients (92.9%) had undergone surgery and were alive. No response was received from 151/667 hip patients (22.6%), 83 (55.0%) of whom were ultimately contacted); or from 108/685 knee patients (15.8%), 91 (84.3%) of whom were ultimately contacted. There was no difference in satisfaction after arthroplasty between initial non-responders and responders for hips (74/81 satisfied vs 476/516 satisfied; p = 0.847) or knees (81/93 satisfied vs 470/561 satisfied; p = 0.480). Initial non-response and persistent non-response was associated with younger age, higher BMIs, and worse preoperative PROMs for both hip and knee patients (p < 0.050). Being in employment was associated with persistent non-response for hip patients (p = 0.047). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that younger age (p < 0.038), higher BMI (p = 0.018), and poorer preoperative OHS (p = 0.031) were independently associated with persistent non-response to hip PROMs. No independent associations were identified for knees. Using a threshold of > 66.4 years predicted a preference for contact by post (area under the curve 0.723 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.647 to 0.799; p < 0.001, though this CI crosses the 0.7 limit considered reliable). Conclusion. The majority of initial non-responders were ultimately contactable with effort. Satisfaction rates were not inferior in patients who did not initially respond to PROMs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(4):275–283

Aims. Nearly 99,000 total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) are performed in UK annually. Despite plenty of research, the satisfaction rate of this surgery is around 80%. One of the important intraoperative factors affecting the outcome is alignment. The relationship between joint obliquity and functional outcomes is not well understood. Therefore, a study is required to investigate and compare the effects of two types of alignment (mechanical and kinematic) on functional outcomes and range of motion. Methods. The aim of the study is to compare navigated kinematically aligned TKAs (KA TKAs) with navigated mechanically aligned TKA (MA TKA) in terms of function and ROM. We aim to recruit a total of 96 patients in the trial. The patients will be recruited from clinics of various consultants working in the trust after screening them for eligibility criteria and obtaining their informed consent to participate in this study. Randomization will be done prior to surgery by a software. The primary outcome measure will be the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score The secondary outcome measures include Oxford Knee Score, ROM, EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire, EuroQol visual analogue scale, 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), and Forgotten Joint Score. The scores will be calculated preoperatively and then at six weeks, six months, and one year after surgery. The scores will undergo a statistical analysis. Discussion. There is no clear evidence on the best alignment for a knee arthroplasty. This randomized controlled trial will test the null hypothesis that navigated KA TKAs do not perform better than navigated MA TKAs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):945–950