Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 6 | Pages 49 - 51
1 Dec 2023
Burden EG Whitehouse MR Evans JT


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 10, Issue 2 | Pages 57 - 59
1 Apr 2021
Evans JT Whitehouse MR Evans JP


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 11 | Pages 631 - 639
1 Nov 2017
Blyth MJG Anthony I Rowe P Banger MS MacLean A Jones B

Objectives

This study reports on a secondary exploratory analysis of the early clinical outcomes of a randomised clinical trial comparing robotic arm-assisted unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) for medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee with manual UKA performed using traditional surgical jigs. This follows reporting of the primary outcomes of implant accuracy and gait analysis that showed significant advantages in the robotic arm-assisted group.

Methods

A total of 139 patients were recruited from a single centre. Patients were randomised to receive either a manual UKA implanted with the aid of traditional surgical jigs, or a UKA implanted with the aid of a tactile guided robotic arm-assisted system. Outcome measures included the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Forgotten Joint Score, Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale, Short Form-12, Pain Catastrophising Scale, somatic disease (Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders Score), Pain visual analogue scale, analgesic use, patient satisfaction, complications relating to surgery, 90-day pain diaries and the requirement for revision surgery.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 3, Issue 1 | Pages 7 - 13
1 Jan 2014
Keurentjes JC Van Tol FR Fiocco M So-Osman C Onstenk R Koopman-Van Gemert AWMM Pöll RG Nelissen RGHH

Objectives

To define Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) thresholds for the Oxford hip score (OHS) and Oxford knee score (OKS) at mid-term follow-up.

Methods

In a prospective multicentre cohort study, OHS and OKS were collected at a mean follow-up of three years (1.5 to 6.0), combined with a numeric rating scale (NRS) for satisfaction and an external validation question assessing the patient’s willingness to undergo surgery again. A total of 550 patients underwent total hip replacement (THR) and 367 underwent total knee replacement (TKR).


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 1, Issue 5 | Pages 71 - 77
1 May 2012
Keurentjes JC Van Tol FR Fiocco M Schoones JW Nelissen RG

Objectives

We aimed first to summarise minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) after total hip (THR) or knee replacement (TKR) in health-related quality of life (HRQoL), measured using the Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Secondly, we aimed to improve the precision of MCID estimates by means of meta-analysis.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of English and non-English articles using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1960–2011), EMBASE (1991–2011), Web of Science, Academic Search Premier and Science Direct. Bibliographies of included studies were searched in order to find additional studies. Search terms included MCID or minimal clinically important change, THR or TKR and Short-Form 36. We included longitudinal studies that estimated MCID of SF-36 after THR or TKR.