Joint Awareness in Different Types of Knee Arthroplasty Evaluated With the Forgotten Joint Score

Thienpont, Emmanuel; Opsomer, Gaëtan; Koninckx, Angelique; Houssiau, Frédéric

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.024

Cited by 110 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…23,24 The FJS has been used earlier to evaluate different types of knee arthroplasty -unicompartmental, patello-femoral and total knee arthroplasty. 25 Evaluation of patients undergoing cruciate-retaining and cruciatesacrificing TKR using the FJS has not been reported earlier.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PCL-retaining versus PCL-substituting TKR – Outcome assessment based on the “forgotten joint score”

Thippanna¹,

Mahesh

Kumar³

2015

Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Methods: In this retrospective study, the recently introduced ''forgotten joint score'' (FJS) was used to assess whether any differences exist between the two types of total knee replacement (TKR). FJ scores of 169 patients with PCL-retaining TKA and 178 patients with PCL sacrificing were obtained. The mean follow-up period was 3.5 years and the minimum follow-up period was 2.5 years.Results: Both groups showed high FJ scores indicating that majority of the patients were oblivious to the presence of the artificial joint during daily activities. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean FJ scores of the two groups. Scores of subsets based on gender, age and unilateral and bilateral TKR also did not show significant differences. Conclusions:Since there are no clinically important differences between the two types of TKR, the choice of the TKA should be based on surgeon preferences and training and local conditions of the knee. Patient-reported outcomes appear to be similar regardless of the choice of TKA. Further prospective studies and validation of FJS outcomes with those of other questionnaires are essential to confirm the absence of differences between PCL retention and sacrifice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PCL-retaining versus PCL-substituting TKR – Outcome assessment based on the “forgotten joint score”

Thippanna¹,

Mahesh

Kumar³

2015

Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The original English FJS is distinguished in brief expression, good reliability, and validity [8–10] and have been translated into three languages including French, Dutch, and Danish [9–11]. However, there is no FJS in the Chinese version for this population so far.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simplified Chinese version of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) for patients who underwent joint arthroplasty: cross-cultural adaptation and validation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a newly developed health-related quality of life (HRQoL) questionnaire designed to evaluate the awareness after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study cross-culturally adapted and psychometrically validated a simplified Chinese version of the FJS (SC-FJS).MethodsCross-cultural adaptation was performed according to the internationally recognized guidelines. One-hundred and fifty participants who underwent primary TKA were recruited in this study. Cronbach’s α and intra-class correlations were used to determine reliability. Construct validity was analyzed by evaluating the correlations between SC-FJS and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the short form (36) health survey (SF-36).ResultsEach of the 12 items was properly responded and correlated with the total items. SC-FJS had excellent reliability [Cronbach’s α = 0.907, intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.970, 95% CI 0.959–0.978). Elimination of any one item in all did not result in a value of Cronbach’s α of <0.80. SC-FJS had a high correlation with symptoms (0.67, p < 0.001) and pain (0.60, p < 0.001) domains of KOOS and social functioning (0.66, p < 0.001) domain of SF-36, and it also moderately correlated with function in daily living (0.53, p < 0.001) and function in sport and recreation (0.40, p < 0.001) domains of KOOS, and physical subscale of SF-36 (0.49–0.53, p < 0.001) but had a low (r = 0.20) or not significant (p > 0.05) correlation with mental subscale of SF-36.ConclusionsSC-FJS demonstrated excellent acceptability, internal consistency, reliability, and construct validity, which can be recommended for patients who underwent joint arthroplasty in Mainland China.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13018-016-0508-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…The FJS focuses on the patients' awareness of their joint arthroplasty during a range of day to day and recreational activities [8]. The FJS has been validated in German and French language form, but not in English [9]. This score consists of 12 questions where subjects are asked to rate their awareness of their joint arthroplasty during various activities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Construct Validity and Test Re-Test Reliability of the Forgotten Joint Score

Thompson

Salmon

Webb

et al. 2015

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Joint Awareness in Different Types of Knee Arthroplasty Evaluated With the Forgotten Joint Score

Cited by 110 publications

References 30 publications

PCL-retaining versus PCL-substituting TKR – Outcome assessment based on the “forgotten joint score”

PCL-retaining versus PCL-substituting TKR – Outcome assessment based on the “forgotten joint score”

Simplified Chinese version of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) for patients who underwent joint arthroplasty: cross-cultural adaptation and validation

Construct Validity and Test Re-Test Reliability of the Forgotten Joint Score

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About