Are Patients' Expectations of Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Fulfilled? A Prospective Study of 130 Patients

Suda, Arnold J.; Seeger, Jörn Bengt; Bitsch, Rudi G.; Krueger, Marlis; Clarius, Michael

doi:10.3928/01477447-20100104-07

Cited by 68 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One aspect where surgeons and patients may differ, however, lies in the difference between a patient's and surgeon's definition of a successful procedure. Two reports have suggested nearly 40% of patients believe their expectations had not been fully met by their total joint arthroplasty [8,44].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do We Need Gender-specific Total Joint Arthroplasty?

Johnson

Costa

Mont

2011

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Gender-specific differences in knee and hip anatomy have been well documented. Although it has been accepted these differences exist, there is controversy regarding if and how these differences should be addressed with gender-specific implant designs. Questions/purposes (1) What are the anatomic and morphologic differences, if any, in the knee and hip between men and women? (2) Do gender-specific TKA designs provide better clinical functioning, survivorship, and improved fit in women? (3) How have anatomic differences in the hip been addressed, if at all, by THA? Methods We conducted a systematic review of the MEDLINE database to identify all articles reviewing basic science and clinical outcomes of gender-specific total knee and total hip implants. From these, we reviewed 253 studies.Results The anatomic studies elucidated multiple differences in the anatomy of knees and hips between men and women. All reviewed studies report similar clinical function and satisfaction scores between men and women for gender-specific TKA and no improvement in these scores when comparing gender-specific TKA to unisex TKA.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do We Need Gender-specific Total Joint Arthroplasty?

Johnson

Costa

Mont

2011

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, patients' satisfaction is conditioned by several other parameters, some of which are not totally defined yet; among them, what patients' expectations may have been previous to the intervention (28,29). Some studies have already shown a clear relationship of patients' expectations with their satisfac- those who surpassed the optimal cut points obtained by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and those who surpassed the mean change value of the improvement in each scale defined by those patients who answered feeling "a little better" 6 months after total hip replacement.…”

Section: Quintana Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes after total hip replacement based on patients' baseline status: What results can be expected?

Quintana¹,

Aguirre²,

Barrio³

et al. 2012

Arthritis Care & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thirteen different clinical assessment tools modified for the evaluation of expectations were identified (Table 3) [2, 13,15,19,23,25,33,39,40,43,44,46,61,65]. All of the modified instruments were designed for self-administration by patients.…”

Section: Expectation Measures For Which Development and Validity Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Expectations in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review

Zywiel

Mahomed

Gandhi

et al. 2013

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

106

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Advances in the surgical treatment of musculoskeletal conditions have resulted in an interest in better defining and understanding patients' expectations of these procedures, but the best ways to do this remain a topic of considerable debate. Questions/purposes (1) What validated instruments for the assessment of patient expectations of orthopaedic surgery have been used in published studies to date? (2) How were these expectation measures developed and validated? (3) What unvalidated instruments for the assessment of patient expectations have been used in published studies to date? Methods A systematic literature search was performed using the OVID Medline and EMBASE databases, in duplicate, to identify all studies that assessed patient expectations in orthopaedic surgery. Sixty-six studies were ultimately included in the present review.Results Seven validated expectation instruments were identified, all of which use patient-reported questionnaires. Five were specific to a particular procedure or affected anatomic location, whereas two were broadly applicable. Details of reliability and validity testing were available for all but one of these instruments. Forty additional unvalidated expectation assessment tools were identified. Thirteen were based on existing clinical outcome tools, and the others were study-specific, custom-developed tools. Only one of the unvalidated tools was used in more than one study. Conclusions Several validated expectation instruments have been developed for use by patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. However, many tools have been reported without evidence of testing and validation. The wide range of untested instruments used in single studies substantially limits the interpretation and comparison of data concerning patient expectations.

show abstract

Are Patients' Expectations of Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Fulfilled? A Prospective Study of 130 Patients

Cited by 68 publications

References 14 publications

Do We Need Gender-specific Total Joint Arthroplasty?

Do We Need Gender-specific Total Joint Arthroplasty?

Outcomes after total hip replacement based on patients' baseline status: What results can be expected?

Measuring Expectations in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About