No abstract

SummaryObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the responsiveness of various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and clinician-reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) over a 2-year period.MethodsData were collected in a prospective cohort study of primary TKA. Patients who had completed Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis (OA) index, EQ-5D, Knee Society Score and range of movement (ROM) assessment were included. Five time points were assessed: pre-operative, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operative.ResultsData from 98 TKAs were available for analysis. Largest effect sizes (ES) for change from pre-operative to 2-month follow-up were observed for the Knee Society Score (KSS) Knee score (1.70) and WOMAC Total (−1.50). For the period from 6 months to 1 year the largest ES for change were shown by the FJS-12 (0.99) and the KSS Function Score (0.88). The EQ-5D showed the strongest ceiling effect at 1-year follow-up with 84.4% of patients scoring the maximum score. ES for the time from 1- to 2-year follow-up were largest for the FJS-12 (0.50). All other outcome measures showed ES equal or below 0.30.ConclusionOutcome measures differ considerably in responsiveness, especially beyond one year post-operatively. Joint-specific outcome measures are more responsive than clinician-reported or generic health outcome tools. The FJS-12 was the most responsive of the tools assessed; suggesting that joint awareness may be a more discerning measure of patient outcome than traditional PROMs.

The FJS-12 has strong measurement properties in terms of validity, internal consistency and sensitivity to change in TKA and THA patients. Low ceiling effects and good relative validity allow the monitoring of longer term outcomes, particularly in well-performing groups after total joint arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:218-24.

Our study aimed at developing clinical thresholds (cut-off scores) for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index, EQ-5D and Knee Society Score for discriminating between patients with and without treatment success following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We performed a retrospective analysis of 1055 patients 2 months after TKA and 765 patients 1 year after TKA. We considered treatment successful if the patient reported high levels of satisfaction and pain relief, functional increase, and a willingness to undergo the same procedure again. Based on this criterion we identified cut-off scores that will facilitate interpretation of the WOMAC, the EQ-5D and the KSS in TKA patients.

Correct placement of the femoral and tibial bone tunnels is decisive for a successful anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Our method of tunnel placement was evaluated as part of quality control at a teaching hospital. The emphasis was placed mainly on investigating the influence of surgical experience on tunnel placement, and the effect of tunnel position on the clinical outcome. Seventeen surgeons with different levels of experience (between 0 and >150 ACL reconstructions) performed endoscopic ACL repair in uniform technique from August 2000 to August 2003 on 50 patients (18 women, 32 men, age range 18-43 years). The patients were available to clinical and radiological follow-up after an average of 19 months. The clinical outcome was classified according to the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) standard evaluation form. The femoral tunnel was evaluated according to the quadrant method of Bernard and Hertel; the position of the tibial bone tunnel was assessed according to the criteria of Stäubli and Rauschnig. The IKDC score revealed 47 (94%) patients with a normal (A) or nearly normal (B) knee joint at follow-up. According to the quadrant method, the femoral canal was situated on average at 29% in the saggital plane. The tibial tunnel was situated on average at 43% of the a.p. diameter of the tibial condyle. Statistical analysis of our data showed no significant correlation between tunnel placement and surgical expertise. However, a highly significant correlation was found (alpha<0.01) between the femoral position of the tunnel in the sagittal plane and the IKDC score. The more anterior the femoral canal, the poorer the IKDC score. The method of tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction being investigated here only showed slight dependence on surgical experience, whereby good short-term clinical outcomes were achieved. Therefore, the method is suitable for application at a teaching hospital. A far too anterior femoral tunnel placement will probably lead to a decline in the clinical result.