The New Knee Society Knee Scoring System

Scuderi, Giles R.; Bourne, Robert B.; Noble, Philip C.; Benjamin, James B.; Lonner, Jess H.; Scott, W. Norman

doi:10.1007/s11999-011-2135-0

Cited by 539 publications

(387 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

379

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…During the past few decades, several disease-specific measures have been used to evaluate outcomes after TKA and there has been wide variation in the reporting of these measures [14,15,18]. Such variation introduces challenges in comparing published studies, which can complicate clinical decision-making, research study design, and policy decisions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Original Knee Society Scores Be Used to Estimate New 2011 Knee Society Scores?

Odum

Fehring

2017

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Original Knee Society Scores Be Used to Estimate New 2011 Knee Society Scores?

Odum

Fehring

2017

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This original score was based on only physicianderived variables, leaving an unresolved poor correlation between objective physician-assessed knee scores and patient-derived satisfaction scores. In 2011, the KSS was revised (KSS2011) to better characterize the expectations, satisfaction, and physical activities of a more diverse population of patients [8]. The KSS2011, a questionnaire that includes subjective and objective evaluations, has enabled the comprehensive assessment of patient knee function before and after surgery with high reliability [9,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score reflects the severity of knee osteoarthritis better than the revised Knee Society Score in a general Japanese population

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to examine population-based reference data for sex-and age-related differences between the 2011 revised Knee Society Score (KSS2011) and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), to assess the correlation between those scores and radiographic knee osteoarthritis (OA), and to validate the use of the scores in a general Japanese population. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 963 volunteers (368 males, 595 females; mean age: 54.7 years). Participants were classified into five subgroups by age: under 40, 40s, 50s, 60s, and over 70 years old. The KSS2011 and KOOS were determined using self-administered questionnaires. Weight-bearing radiographs of the bilateral knee were taken and graded according to the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) scale. The mean KSS2011 and KOOS were compared among age groups. Correlations between the severity of knee OA and each score were assessed using multiple regression analysis. Results: The overall KSS2011 tended to gradually decrease with age. Most subscales of the KSS2011 did not show sex-related differences. Similarly, the overall KOOS and all its subscales steadily decreased by approximately 20 points per decade with age. Most subscales of the KOOS were significantly decreased in females over 50. The KL grade was significantly related to both the overall KOOS (β = −0.42, p b 0.001) and KSS2011 (β = −0.13, p = 0.001), though the correlation to the KOOS was stronger. Conclusion: The overall KSS2011 and KOOS appear to decrease with age. In this population, the KOOS reflects the severity of knee OA better than the KSS2011.

show abstract

“…Many different measures have been advocated to gauge the effectiveness of TKA and to assess variations in clinical pathways, patient selection, surgical approaches, and different implant designs [3,6,9,21,22,30,37,39,48 and references therein]. Because these outcome measurements inform fundamental decisions concerning the efficacy and quality of patient care, it is imperative that these tools be free of biases that could lead to inaccurate estimates of treatment effects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Statistical Considerations in the Psychometric Validation of Outcome Measures

Sikorskii

Noble

2013

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The evaluation of the outcomes of total knee arthroplasty requires measurement tools that are valid, reliable, and responsive to change. However, the accuracy of any outcome measurement is determined by the validity and reliability of the instrument used. To ensure this accuracy, it is imperative that each instrument used in orthopaedics is free of biases leading to inaccurate estimates of treatment effects. Where are we now? Many patient-derived outcome instruments have been developed and tested through the application of the standard assessments that form the basis of classical test theory: validity, reliability, and responsiveness. These assessments determine if the instrument reliably measures what it is intended to measure, and if it captures differences among groups of patients or changes over time.

show abstract

The New Knee Society Knee Scoring System

Cited by 539 publications

References 4 publications

Can Original Knee Society Scores Be Used to Estimate New 2011 Knee Society Scores?

Can Original Knee Society Scores Be Used to Estimate New 2011 Knee Society Scores?

The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score reflects the severity of knee osteoarthritis better than the revised Knee Society Score in a general Japanese population

Statistical Considerations in the Psychometric Validation of Outcome Measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About