Aims. The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess the outcome after total knee (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasing, with associated regulatory mandates. However, the robustness and clinical relevance of long-term data are often questionable. It is important to determine whether using long-term PROMs data justify the resources, costs, and difficulties associated with their collection. The aim of this study was to assess studies involving TKA and THA to determine which PROMs are most commonly reported, how complete PROMs data are at ≥ five years postoperatively, and the extent to which the scores change between early and long-term follow-up. Methods. We conducted a systematic review of the literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with sufficient reporting of PROMs were included. The mean difference in scores from the preoperative condition to early follow-up times (between one and two years), and from early to final follow-up, were calculated. The mean rates of change in the scores were calculated from representative studies. Meta-analyses were also performed on the most frequently reported PROMs. Results. A total of 24 studies were assessed. The most frequently reported PROMs were the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) for TKA and the University of California, Los Angeles activity scale for THA. The mean rate of follow-up based on the number of patients available at final follow-up was 70.5% (39.2% to 91.0%) for knees and 82.1% (63.2% to 92.3%) for hips. The actual rates of collection of PROM scores were lower. For TKA, the mean OKS, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and transformed WOMAC changes were -16.3 (95% CI -17.5 to -15.2), 23.2 (95% CI 17.2 to 29.2), and -29.7 (95% CI -32.4 to -27.0) points for short-term follow-up. These decreased to 1.3 (95% CI -0.8 to 3.3), -3.4 (95% CI -7.0 to 0.3), and 4.7 (95% CI -1.5 to 10.9) points for the remaining follow-up. A similar meta-analysis was not possible for studies involving THA. We commonly observed that the scores
Robotic-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (R-UKA) has been proposed as an approach to improve the results of the conventional manual UKA (C-UKA). The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze the studies comparing R-UKA and C-UKA in terms of clinical outcomes, radiological results, operating time, complications, and revisions. The literature search was conducted on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science) on 20 February 2024 according to the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Inclusion criteria were comparative studies, written in the English language, with no time limitations, on the comparison of R-UKA and C-UKA. The quality of each article was assessed using the Downs and Black Checklist for Measuring Quality.Aims
Methods
Aims. The aims of this systematic review were to describe the quantity and methodological quality of meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery published during the last 17 years. Materials and Methods. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed, between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2016, were searched for meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery dealing with at least one surgical intervention. Meta-analyses were included if the interventions involved a human muscle, ligament, bone or joint. Results. A total of 392 meta-analyses met eligibility criteria, for which the mean AMSTAR quality score was 7.1/11. There was a positive correlation between the year of publication and the quality of the meta-analysis (r = 0.238, p < 0.001). Between 2000 and 2011, the mean AMSTAR score corresponded to that of a medium quality review. However, between 2012 and 2016, the mean scores have been consistently equivalent to those of a high-quality review. The number of meta-analyses published increased 10-fold between 2005 and 2014. Conclusion. The quantity and quality of meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery which have been published has increased, reaching a