3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reduction in patient outcomes but implant-derived preservation of function following total knee arthroplasty: longitudinal follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

      research-article
      , PhD, MCSP 1 , , FRCS Orth (Ed) 1 , , FRCS Orth (Ed) 1 , , FRCS Orth (Ed) 1 , , DPhil, FRCS Orth (Eng and Ed) 1 , , FRCS Orth (Ed and Gla) 1 , , FRCS Orth (Ed) 1
      The Bone & Joint Journal
      The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery
      Total knee arthroplasty, Outcomes, Patient function, Implant design

      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

          Aims

          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.

          Methods

          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.

          Results

          The mean follow-up of the 125 patients was 8.12 years (7.3 to 9.4). There was a reduction in all assessment parameters relative to earlier assessments. Longitudinal models highlight changes over time in all parameters and demonstrate large effect sizes. Significant between-group differences were seen in measures of knee flexion (medium-effect size), lower limb power output (large-effect size), and report of worst daily pain experienced (large-effect size) favouring the Triathlon group. No longitudinal between-group differences were observed in mean OKS, average daily pain report, or timed performance test. Satisfaction with outcome in surviving patients at eight years was 90.5% (57/63) in the Triathlon group and 82.8% (48/58) in the Kinemax group, with no statistical difference between groups (p = 0.321).

          Conclusion

          At a mean 8.12 years, this mid-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial cohort highlights a general reduction in measures of patient function with patient age and follow-up duration, and a comparative preservation of function based on implant received at time of surgery.

          Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):434–441.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

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

          Knee replacement

          Knee replacement surgery is one of the most commonly done and cost-effective musculoskeletal surgical procedures. The numbers of cases done continue to grow worldwide, with substantial variation in utilisation rates across regions and countries. The main indication for surgery remains painful knee osteoarthritis with reduced function and quality of life. The threshold for intervention is not well defined, and is influenced by many factors including patient and surgeon preference. Most patients have a very good clinical outcome after knee replacement, but multiple studies have reported that 20% or more of patients do not. So despite excellent long-term survivorship, more work is required to enhance this procedure and development is rightly focused on increasing the proportion of patients who have successful pain relief after surgery. Changing implant design has historically been a target for improving outcome, but there is greater recognition that improvements can be achieved by better implantation methods, avoiding complications, and improving perioperative care for patients, such as enhanced recovery programmes. New technologies are likely to advance future knee replacement care further, but their introduction must be regulated and monitored with greater rigour to ensure patient safety.
            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
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Research Fellow
                Role: Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
                Role: Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
                Role: Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
                Role: Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery
                Role: Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery
                Role: Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon
                Journal
                Bone Joint J
                Bone Joint J
                Bjj
                The Bone & Joint Journal
                The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery (London )
                2049-4394
                2049-4408
                April 2020
                1 April 2020
                : 102-B
                : 4
                : 434-441
                Affiliations
                [1 ]org-divisionDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh , Edinburgh, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence should be sent to David F. Hamilton; E-mail: d.f.hamilton@ 123456ed.ac.uk
                Article
                BJJ-102B-434
                10.1302/0301-620X.102B4.BJJ-2019-0767.R2
                7133720
                32228078
                e13e1249-899a-4391-9839-34a19cb22f29
                ©2019 Author(s) et al

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, which permits the copying and redistribution of the work only, and provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                Categories
                Knee
                Total Blood Loss
                Oral Tranexamic Acid
                Randomized Controlled Trial
                Total Knee Arthroplasty
                Knee, knee
                Custom metadata
                $2.00
                University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
                Knee
                All authors report payments from Stryker, paid to the University of Edinburgh, both related and unrelated to this study. D. Hamilton, R. Burnett, J. T. Patton, and G. J. MacPherson report payments from Stryker for lectures, unrelated to this study. A. H. R. W. Simpson sits on the editorial board of The Bone & Joint Journal, and reports payments, paid to the University of Edinburgh, from ESPRC, OTCF, and DePuy, unrelated to this study. J. T. Patton also sits of the editorial board of The Bone & Joint Journal.

                total knee arthroplasty,outcomes,patient function,implant design

                Comments

                Comment on this article