4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Functional outcome of total knee replacement: a study protocol for a prospective, double-blinded, parallel-group randomized, clinical controlled trial of novel, personalized and conventional implants

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The development of total knee replacement (TKR) implant designs aims to improve outcome regarding pain, function, joint stiffness, instability, patellar problems, and ultimately wear of the implant. Recently, two major orthopaedic implant manufacturers launched a new generation of TKR implants which, according to the manufacturers, provide improved functional outcome. However, the benefits of these new TKR designs claimed by the manufacturers in terms of improved functional outcome still lack scientific documentation. The present randomized controlled trial has been designed to compare three fixed bearing, cemented cruciate-retaining (CR) designs; one of the new personalized TKR design with two conventional TKR designs with the main emphasis being on functional outcome.

          Methods

          The present study is a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, single-center intervention trial. A total of 240 patients will be recruited to participate in a parallel-group study at Coxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland. We will compare the short-term functional outcome of TKR performed with a novel personalized TKR design (Persona CR, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) against TKRs performed with two conventional designs (PFC CR, DePuy, Warsaw, IN, USA and Nexgen CR, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA). In total, 80 patients will be randomized in each of the three study arms. The primary outcome in this study is the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), which is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). Secondary outcome measures include the Forgotten Joint Score, the 15D, the UCLA activity score, and the VAS pain scale. The results will be analyzed after 2-year follow-up.

          Discussion

          This paper presents a prospective, randomized, single-center trial study protocol. It provides details of patient randomization, PROMs, follow-up, methods of analysis of the material, and publication plan. An important aspect that will be considered in the study will be the economic effects of the novel designs as they are substantially more expensive, and the benefits of the added costs remain unknown. In addition, it is especially important to carry out evaluative studies in independent centers that are not biased by the interests of the manufacturers.

          Trial registration

          Retrospectively registered, November, 2017, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03339557.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores.

          The Oxford hip and knee scores have been extensively used since they were first described in 1996 and 1998. During this time, they have been modified and used for many different purposes. This paper describes how they should be used and seeks to clarify areas of confusion.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature.

            Total hip and total knee arthroplasties are well accepted as reliable and suitable surgical procedures to return patients to function. Health-related quality-of-life instruments have been used to document outcomes in order to optimize the allocation of resources. The objective of this study was to review the literature regarding the outcomes of total hip and knee arthroplasties as evaluated by health-related quality-of-life instruments. The Medline and EMBASE medical literature databases were searched, from January 1980 to June 2003, to identify relevant studies. Studies were eligible for review if they met the following criteria: (1). the language was English or French, (2). at least one well-validated and self-reported health-related quality of life instrument was used, and (3). a prospective cohort study design was used. Of the seventy-four studies selected for the review, thirty-two investigated both total hip and total knee arthroplasties, twenty-six focused on total hip arthroplasty, and sixteen focused on total knee arthroplasty exclusively. The most common diagnosis was osteoarthritis. The duration of follow-up ranged from seven days to seven years, with the majority of studies describing results at six to twelve months. The Short Form-36 and the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index, the most frequently used instruments, were employed in forty and twenty-eight studies, respectively. Seventeen studies used a utility index. Overall, total hip and total knee arthroplasties were found to be quite effective in terms of improvement in health-related quality-of-life dimensions, with the occasional exception of the social dimension. Age was not found to be an obstacle to effective surgery, and men seemed to benefit more from the intervention than did women. When improvement was found to be modest, the role of comorbidities was highlighted. Total hip arthroplasty appears to return patients to function to a greater extent than do knee procedures, and primary surgery offers greater improvement than does revision. Patients who had poorer preoperative health-related quality of life were more likely to experience greater improvement. Health-related quality-of-life data are valuable, can provide relevant health-status information to health professionals, and should be used as a rationale for the implementation of the most adequate standard of care. Additional knowledge and scientific dissemination of surgery outcomes should help to ensure better management of patients undergoing total hip or total knee arthroplasty and to optimize the use of these procedures.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery

              Objectives To present estimates of clinically meaningful or minimal important changes for the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) after joint replacement surgery. Study Design and Setting Secondary data analysis of the NHS patient-reported outcome measures data set that included 82,415 patients listed for hip replacement surgery and 94,015 patients listed for knee replacement surgery was performed. Results Anchor-based methods revealed that meaningful change indices at the group level [minimal important change (MIC)], for example in cohort studies, were ∼11 points for the OHS and ∼9 points for the OKS. For assessment of individual patients, receiver operating characteristic analysis produced MICs of 8 and 7 points for OHS and OKS, respectively. Additionally, the between group minimal important difference (MID), which allows the estimation of a clinically relevant difference in change scores from baseline when comparing two groups, that is, for clinical trials, was estimated to be ∼5 points for both the OKS and the OHS. The distribution-based minimal detectable change (MDC90) estimates for the OKS and OHS were 4 and 5 points, respectively. Conclusion This study has produced and discussed estimates of minimal important change/difference for the OKS/OHS. These estimates should be used in the power calculations and the interpretation of studies using the OKS and OHS. The MDC90 (∼4 points OKS and ∼5 points OHS) represents the smallest possible detectable change for each of these instruments, thus indicating that any lower value would fall within measurement error.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                tero.irmola@fimnet.fi
                jarmo.kangas@coxa.fi
                antti.eskelinen@coxa.fi
                mika.niemelainen@coxa.fi
                heini.huhtala@uta.fi
                ville.mattila@staff.uta.fi
                teemu.moilanen@coxa.fi
                Journal
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskelet Disord
                BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2474
                12 October 2019
                12 October 2019
                2019
                : 20
                : 443
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0639 5429, GRID grid.459422.c, Coxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, ; Tampere, Finland
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2314 6254, GRID grid.502801.e, Tampere University, ; Tampere, Finland
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0628 2985, GRID grid.412330.7, Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma, , Tampere University Hospital, ; Tampere, Finland
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1785-5174
                Article
                2830
                10.1186/s12891-019-2830-7
                6790022
                31604440
                ac19d9d9-eaac-4465-8eb0-9a0690759c46
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 5 February 2019
                : 12 September 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Government
                Award ID: Institutional grant
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Orthopedics
                knee osteoarthritis,arthroplasty,total knee replacement,novel designs,functional outcome,prospective studies,clinical protocols

                Comments

                Comment on this article