In revision knee arthroplasty, rotating hinge implants (RHK) have been considered to result in higher complication rates and lower survivorship when compared to constrained condylar implants (CCK). The aims of this study were to compare patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), complication rates and survivorship of RHK and CCK used in revision arthroplasty at a single, high volume elective orthopaedic centre with previously validated bespoke database. One hundred and eight patients who underwent revision knee arthroplasty with either CCK or RHK and matched our inclusion criteria were identified. EQ5D, Health State and Oxford Knee Scores were collected pre-operatively and at 1 year post-operatively. Complication data was collected at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operatively. NJR data was interrogated, in addition to our own database, to investigate implant survival.Abstract
Introduction
Methodology
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.Abstract
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. 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.Purpose
Background
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. 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.Purpose
Method
