Although total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a highly successful procedure, about 20% of patients remain dissatisfied postoperatively. This proportion is derived from dichotomous models of the assessment of surgical success or failure, which may not reflect the spectrum of outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore differing responses to surgery, and assess whether there are distinct groups of patients with differing patterns of outcome. This was a secondary analysis of a UK multicentre TKA longitudinal cohort study. We used a group-based trajectory modelling analysis of Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in the first year following surgery with longitudinal data involving five different timepoints and multiple predictor variables. Associations between the derived trajectory groups and categorical baseline variables were assessed, and predictors of trajectory group membership were identified using Poisson regression and multinomial logistic regression, as appropriate. The final model was adjusted for sociodemographic factors (age, sex) and baseline OKS.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal important change (MIC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) threshold in the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) according to patient satisfaction six months following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). During a one-year period 484 patients underwent a primary TKA and completed preoperative and six-month FJS and OKS. At six months patients were asked, “How satisfied are you with your operated knee?” Their response was recorded as: very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. The difference between patients recording neutral (n = 44) and satisfied (n = 153) was used to define the MCID. MIC for a cohort was defined as the change in the FJS for those patients declaring their outcome as satisfied, whereas receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the MIC for an individual and the PASS threshold. Distribution-based methodology was used to calculate the MDC.Aims
Methods
There are comparatively few randomized studies evaluating knee arthroplasty prostheses, and fewer still that report longer-term functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of an existing implant trial cohort to document changing patient function over time following total knee arthroplasty using longitudinal analytical techniques and to determine whether implant design chosen at time of surgery influenced these outcomes. A mid-term follow-up of the remaining 125 patients from a randomized cohort of total knee arthroplasty patients (initially comprising 212 recruited patients), comparing modern (Triathlon) and traditional (Kinemax) prostheses was undertaken. Functional outcomes were assessed with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), knee range of movement, pain numerical rating scales, lower limb power output, timed functional assessment battery, and satisfaction survey. Data were linked to earlier assessment timepoints, and analyzed by repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) mixed models, incorporating longitudinal change over all assessment timepoints.Aims
Methods
Responsiveness to clinically important change is a key feature of any outcome measure. Throughout Europe, health-related quality of life following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is routinely measured with EuroQol five-dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaires. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 10-Question Short-Form (PROMIS-10 Global Health) score is a new general heath outcome tool which is thought to offer greater responsiveness. Our aim was to compare these two tools. We accessed data from a prospective multicentre cohort study in the United Kingdom, which evaluated outcomes following TKA. The median age of the 721 patients was 69.0 years (interquartile range, 63.3 to 74.6). There was an even division of sex, and approximately half were educated to secondary school level. The preoperative EQ-5D, PROMIS-10, and Oxford Knee Scores (OKS) were available and at three, six, and 12 months postoperatively. Internal responsiveness was assessed by standardized response mean (SRM) and effect size (Cohen’s Aims
Patients and Methods
Worldwide rates of primary and revision total
knee arthroplasty (TKA) are rising due to increased longevity of
the population and the burden of osteoarthritis. Revision TKA is a technically demanding procedure generating
outcomes which are reported to be inferior to those of primary knee
arthroplasty, and with a higher risk of complication. Overall, the
rate of revision after primary arthroplasty is low, but the number
of patients currently living with a TKA suggests a large potential
revision healthcare burden. Many patients are now outliving their prosthesis, and consideration
must be given to how we are to provide the necessary capacity to
meet the rising demand for revision surgery and how to maximise
patient outcomes. The purpose of this review was to examine the epidemiology of,
and risk factors for, revision knee arthroplasty, and to discuss
factors that may enhance patient outcomes. Cite this article:
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is an established
and successful procedure. However, the design of prostheses continues
to be modified in an attempt to optimise the functional outcome
of the patient. The aim of this study was to determine if patient outcome after
TKA was influenced by the design of the prosthesis used. A total of 212 patients (mean age 69; 43 to 92; 131 female (62%),
81 male (32%)) were enrolled in a single centre double-blind trial
and randomised to receive either a Kinemax (group 1) or a Triathlon
(group 2) TKA. Patients were assessed pre-operatively, at six weeks, six months,
one year and three years after surgery. The outcome assessments
used were the Oxford Knee Score; range of movement; pain numerical
rating scales; lower limb power output; timed functional assessment
battery and a satisfaction survey. Data were assessed incorporating
change over all assessment time points, using repeated measures
analysis of variance longitudinal mixed models. Implant group 2
showed a significantly greater range of movement (p = 0.009), greater
lower limb power output (p = 0.026) and reduced report of ‘worst
daily pain’ (p = 0.003) over the three years of follow-up. Differences
in Oxford Knee Score (p = 0.09), report of ‘average daily pain’
(p = 0.57) and timed functional performance tasks (p = 0.23) did
not reach statistical significance. Satisfaction with outcome was
significantly better in group 2 (p = 0.001). These results suggest that patient outcome after TKA can be influenced
by the prosthesis used. Cite this article:
Instability is the reason for revision of a primary
total knee replacement (TKR) in 20% of patients. To date, the diagnosis
of instability has been based on the patient’s symptoms and a subjective
clinical assessment. We assessed whether a measured standardised
forced leg extension could be used to quantify instability. A total of 25 patients (11 male/14 female, mean age 70 years;
49 to 85) who were to undergo a revision TKR for instability of
a primary implant were assessed with a Nottingham rig pre-operatively
and then at six and 26 weeks post-operatively. Output was quantified
(in revolutions per minute (rpm)) by accelerating a stationary flywheel.
A control group of 183 patients (71 male/112 female, mean age 69
years) who had undergone primary TKR were evaluated for comparison. Pre-operatively, all 25 patients with instability exhibited a
distinctive pattern of reduction in ‘mid-push’ speed. The mean reduction
was 55 rpm ( Cite this article:
The aim of this study was to determine the association
between the Oxford knee score (OKS) and direct assessment of outcome,
and to examine how this relationship varied at different time-points
following total knee replacement (TKR). Prospective data consisting
of the OKS, numerical rating scales for ‘worst pain’ and ‘perceived
mean daily pain’, timed functional assessments (chair rising, stairs
and walking ability), goniometry and lower limb power were recorded
for 183 patients pre-operatively and at six, 26 and 52 weeks post-operatively.
The OKS was influenced primarily by the patient’s level of pain
rather than objective functional assessments. The relationship between report
of outcome and direct assessment changed over time: R2 =
35% pre-operatively, 44% at six weeks, 57% at 26 weeks and 62% at
52 weeks. The relationship between assessment of performance and report
of performance improved as the patient’s report of pain diminished,
suggesting that patients’ reporting of functional outcome after
TKR is influenced more by their pain level than their ability to
accomplish tasks.
