scholarly journals A matched comparison of the patient-reported outcome measures of cemented and cementless total knee replacements, based on the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Isle of Man and England’s National PROM collection programme

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hasan R Mohammad ◽  
Andrew Judge ◽  
David W Murray

Background and purpose — Total knee replacement (TKR) can be implanted with or without bone cement. It is currently unknown how the functional outcomes compare. Therefore, we compared the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) of both fixation methods. Patients and methods — We performed a propensitymatched comparison of 14,404 TKRs (7,202 cemented and 7,202 cementless) enrolled in the National Joint Registry and the English National PROMs collection programme. Subgroup analyses were performed in different age groups (1) < 55 years; (2) 55–64 years; (3) 65–74 years; (4) ≥ 75 years. Results — The 6-month postoperative Oxford Knee Score (OKS) was significantly (p < 0.001) higher for cemented TKR (35, SD 9.7) than cementless TKR (34, SD 9.9). The OKS was also significantly higher for the cemented TKR in all age groups, except the 55–64-year group. A significantly higher proportion of cemented TKRs had an excellent OKS (≥ 41) compared with cementless (32% vs. 28%, p < 0.001) and a lower proportion of poor (< 27) scores (19% vs. 22%, p = 0.001). This was also observed for all age subgroups. Therewere no significant differences in EQ-5D points gained postoperatively between the groups respectively (0.31 vs. 0.30, p = 0.1). Interpretation — Cemented TKRs had a greater proportion of excellent OKS scores and lower proportion of poor scores both overall and across all age groups. However, the absolute differences are small and below the minimally clinically important difference, making both fixation types acceptable. Currently the vast majority of TKRs are cemented and the results from this study suggest that this isappropriate.

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sujin Kang

Abstract Background The degree to which a validated instrument is able to detect clinically significant change over time is an important issue for the better management of hip or knee replacement surgery. This study examines the internal responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L, the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), and the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) by various methods. Data from NHS patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) linked to the Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) dataset (2009–2015) was analysed for patients who underwent primary hip surgery (N = 181,424) and primary knee surgery (N = 191,379). Methods Paired data-specific univariate responsiveness was investigated using the standardized response mean (SRM), the standardized effect size (SES), and the responsiveness index (RI). Multivariate responsiveness was furthermore examined using the defined capacity of benefit score (i.e. paired data-specific MCID), adjusting baseline covariates such as age, gender, and comorbidities in the Box-Cox regression models. The observed and predicted percentages of patient improvement were examined both as a whole and by the patients' self-assessed transition level. Results The results showed that both the OHS and the OKS demonstrated great univariate and multivariate responsiveness. The percentages of the observed (predicted) total improvement were high: 51 (54)% in the OHS and 73 (58)% in OKS. The OHS and the OKS showed distinctive differences in improvement by the 3-level transition, i.e. a little better vs. about the same vs. a little worse. The univariate responsiveness of the EQ-5D-3L showed moderate effects in total by Cohen’s thresholds. The percentages of improvement in the EQ-5D-3L were moderate: 44 (48)% in the hip and 42 (44)% for the knee replacement population. Conclusions Distinctive percentage differences in patients’ perception of improvement were observed when the paired data-specific capacity of benefit score was applied to examine responsiveness. This is useful in clinical practice as rationale for access to surgery at the individual-patient level. This study shows the importance of analytic methods and instruments for investigation of the health status in hip and/or knee replacement surgery. The study finding also supports the idea of using a generic measure along with the disease-specific instruments in terms of cross-validation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 103 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-73
Author(s):  
F Begum ◽  
A Panagiotidou ◽  
C Park ◽  
T Ashdown ◽  
S El-Tawil

Introduction NHS England uses the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) as part of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to evaluate ‘health gains’ following total knee replacement. Policy makers use this to guide healthcare funding and resource allocation. Our study aims to undertake a qualitative and quantitative analysis of OKS among patients who experienced a negative outcome after a total knee replacement at our centre. Materials and methods Between April 2017-March 2018, 19 of 189 (10%) patients had a worsened OKS at our centre. We retrospectively and prospectively reviewed 14 of these patients. Structured telephone interviews with a repeat OKS were carried out in September 2019 (18–29 months post-operation). Results Eight patients were female and the total age range was 57–95, mean average 75.6 (SD 9.9 years). Of 48 (higher scores meaning better outcomes), the average preoperative OKS was 24.2 and the average postoperative OKS at 6 months was 19.4 (decrease of 20%). The average postoperative OKS at 18–29 months was 35.6 (an increase of 83.5% from 6 months). Discussion The OKS was developed and validated over 20 years ago in Oxford. In our study, four patients asked for clarification of questions 4, 6 and 10 owing to ambiguous language. All 14 patients who had negative OKS outcomes had positive outcomes when retested after 18 months, depicting ‘health gains’ not conveyed in PROMs analysis. Conclusion The OKS needs to be revalidated on current patient groups for accurate and reliable data. Further prospective studies should be undertaken on larger cohorts to understand the recovery course and whether PROMs should be carried out later.


The Knee ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 156-166
Author(s):  
Yoshinori Okamoto ◽  
Hitoshi Wakama ◽  
Tomohiro Okayoshi ◽  
Junya Matsuyama ◽  
Shuhei Otsuki ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document