Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Satisfaction and Health-Related Quality of Life Following Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Surgeries in Indian Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Recently, the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been considered as the most important assessment tool for surgical outcome evaluation in arthroplasty. However, no study from the Indian subcontinent has evaluated the PROM in the total hip (THA) and knee (TKA) arthroplasties.

Materials and Methods

This cross-sectional study evaluated the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of 1244 North Indian patients following primary THA and TKA who had at least one-year follow-up. This study included 617 patients with 664 THA and 627 patients with 1152 TKA. The patients were asked to answer the EQ-5D-5L questionnaires and EQ-VAS in their own languages. The EQ-5D-5L values were used to derive level frequency scores (LFS) with validated Indian norms of EuroQoL.

Results

Ninety percent of THA and 82% of TKA patients rated excellent HRQoL using EQ-VAS. The regression analysis revealed age, gender, etiology and brand of prosthesis had a significant impact on EQ-5D-5L following THA. However, gender and simultaneous bilateral surgery were found to be important predictors of outcome in TKA. The mean value of LFS for THA was 0.95 ± 0.12 and TKA was 0.88 + 0.24 (p < 0.001). However, There was no difference in LFS between THA and TKA when only elderly patients (> 60 years) were considered (p = 0.168).

Conclusion

THA patients reported better HRQoL than TKA in the Indian subcontinent. One of the factors for a better outcome in hip arthroplasty was the relatively younger age of the patients. Patients above 60 years of age reported similar levels of statisfactior in both THA and TKA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hunter, D. J., March, L., & Chew, M. (2020). Osteoarthritis in 2020 and beyond: a Lancet Commission. Lancet, 396(10264), 1711–1712. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32230-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zhang, J., Ndou, W. S., Ng, N., Gaston, P., Simpson, P. M., Macpherson, G. J., et al. (2021). Robotic-arm assisted total knee arthroplasty is associated with improved accuracy and patient reported outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surgery, Sport Traumatology, Arthroscopy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06464-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Felix, J., Becker, C., Vogl, M., Buschner, P., Plötz, W., & Leidl, R. (2019). Patient characteristics and valuation changes impact quality of life and satisfaction in total knee arthroplasty—results from a German prospective cohort study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 17(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Palazzo, C., Jourdan, C., Descamps, S., Nizard, R., Hamadouche, M., Anract, P., et al. (2014). Determinants of satisfaction 1 year after total hip arthroplasty: the role of expectations fulfilment. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 15(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Thambiah, M. D., Nathan, S., Seow, B. Z., Liang, S., & Lingaraj, K. (2015). Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: an Asian perspective. Singapore Medical Journal, 56(5), 259–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sharma, S., Shah, R., Draviraj, K. P., & Bhamra, M. S. (2005). Use of telephone interviews to follow up patients after total hip replacement. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 11(4), 211–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weldring, T., & Smith, S. M. S. (2013). Article commentary: patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Health Services Insights, 6, 61–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tripathy, S. K., Varghese, P., Srinivasan, A., Goyal, T., Purudappa, P. P., Sen, R. K., & Chandrappa, M. H. (2020). Joint awareness after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06327-4 Epub ahead of print. PMID: 33078218.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Group THEW. (1998). Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological Medicine, 28, 551–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mielenz, T., Jackson, E., Currey, S., Devellis, R., & Callahan, L. F. (2006). Psychometric properties of the centers for disease control and prevention health-related quality of life (CDC HRQOL) items in adults with arthritis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 8, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Herdman, M., Gudex, C., Lloyd, A., Janssen, M., Kind, P., Parkin, D., et al. (2011). Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Quality of Life Research, 20(10), 1727–1736.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mohanty, S. S., Mohan, H., Rathod, T. N., & Kamble, P. (2020). Patient satisfaction related outcome after total hip arthroplasty; does bearing surface play a role ? Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma, 11, S196-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2019.12.017

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Jyani, G., Prinja, S., Kar, S. S., Trivedi, M., Patro, B., Purba, F., et al. (2020). Valuing health-related quality of life among the Indian population: a protocol for the Development of an EQ-5D value set for India using an extended design (DEVINE) Study. British Medical Journal Open, 10(11), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vos, T., Abajobir, A. A., Abbafati, C., Abbas, K. M., Abate, K. H., Abd-Allah, F., et al. (2017). Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet, 390(10100), 1211–1259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rolfson, O., Eresian Chenok, K., Bohm, E., Lübbeke, A., Denissen, G., Dunn, J., et al. (2016). Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries: report of the patient-reported outcome measures working group of the international society of arthroplasty registries: part I. Overview and rationale for patient-reported outcome measures. Acta Orthopaedica, 87, 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dunbar, M. J., Richardson, G., & Robertsson, O. (2013). I can’t get no satisfaction after my total knee replacement: rhymes and reasons. The Bone and Joint Journal, 95(11 Suppl A), 148–152. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32767 PMID: 24187375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bourne, R. B., Chesworth, B. M., Davis, A. M., Mahomed, N. N., & Charron, K. D. J. (2010). Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 468(1), 57–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Baker, P. N., van der Meulen, J. H., Lewsey, J., & Gregg, P. J. (2007). The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. Data from the national joint registry for England and Wales. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Series B, 89(7), 893–900.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Judge, A., Arden, N. K., Cooper, C., Kassim Javaid, M., Carr, A. J., Field, R. E., et al. (2012). Predictors of outcomes of total knee replacement surgery. Rheumatolohy (United Kingdom)., 51(10), 1804–1813.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Devasenapathy, N., Malhotra, R., Mittal, K., Garg, B., Kumar, V., Zodpey, S., et al. (2020). Higher disability in women than men scheduled for total knee arthroplasty for degenerative osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional analysis from India. ACR Open Rheumatology, 2(6), 309–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kahlenberg, C. A., Lyman, S., Joseph, A. D., Chiu, Y. F., & Padgett, D. E. (2019). Comparison of patient-reported outcomes based on implant brand in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. The Bone and Joint Journal, 101-B(7_Supple_C), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1382.R1 PMID: 31256639.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Connelly, J. W., Galea, V. P., Rojanasopondist, P., Nielsen, C. S., Bragdon, C. R., Kappel, A., et al. (2020). Which preoperative factors are associated with not attaining acceptable levels of pain and function after TKA? Findings from an international multicenter study. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 478(5), 1019–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Amlie, E., Havelin, L. I., Furnes, O., Baste, V., Nordsletten, L., Hovik, O., et al. (2014). Worse patient-reported outcome after lateral approach than after anterior and posterolateral approach in primary hip arthroplasty a cross-sectional questionnaire study of 1476 patients 1–3 years after surgery. Acta Orthopaedica, 85(5), 463–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Schaal, T., Schoenfelder, T., Klewer, J., & Kugler, J. (2016). Determinants of patient satisfaction and their willingness to return after primary total hip replacement: a cross-sectional study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorder, 17(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1196-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Anakwe, R. E., Jenkins, P. J., & Moran, M. (2011). Predicting dissatisfaction after total hip arthroplasty: a study of 850 patients. Journal of Arthroplasty, 26(2), 209–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2010.03.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Greene, M. E., Rolfson, O., Gordon, M., Garellick, G., & Nemes, S. (2015). Standard comorbidity measures do not predict patient-reported outcomes 1 year after total hip arthroplasty. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 473(11), 3370–3379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Tariq, M. B., Vega, J. F., Westermann, R., Jones, M., & Spindler, K. P. (2019). Arthroplasty studies with greater than 1000 participants: analysis of follow-up methods. Arthroplast Today., 5(2), 243–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. EuroQol Research Foundation (2021) Choosing a value set. 3–5. Available from: https://euroqol.org/eq-5d-instruments/eq-5d-3l-about/valuation/choosing-a-value-set/

  29. Feng, Y. S., Kohlmann, T., Janssen, M. F., & Buchholz, I. (2021). Psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-5L: a systematic review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 30(3), 647–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02688-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Parik, P., & Patel, V. (2019). Health-related quality of life of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus at a tertiary care hospital in India using EQ-5D-5L. Indian J Endocrinol Metab., 23(4), 407–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Tripathy, S., Hansda, U., Seth, N., Rath, S., Rao, P. B., Mishra, T. S., et al. (2015). Validation of the euroqol five-dimensions—three-level quality of life instrument in a classical Indian language (Odia) and its use to assess quality of life and health status of cancer patients in Eastern India. Indian Journal of Palliative Care, 21(3), 282–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Orthopaedics, Max Hospital Mohali, Punjab, 160055, India

    Ramesh K. Sen, Veeresh Shetti, Reet Mukhopadhyay, Gaurav Saini, Sagar Kadam Dip, Neha Raman, Monica Rana & Kamini Vashishta

  2. Orthopaedics, AIIMS, Bhubaneswar, 751019, India

    Sujit Kumar Tripathy

  3. Department of Statistics and Ex-Coordinator, Centre for Systems Biology and Bioinformatics, Panjab University, Chandigarh, 160014, India

    Suresh Kumar Sharma

Authors
  1. Ramesh K. Sen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Veeresh Shetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Reet Mukhopadhyay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sujit Kumar Tripathy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gaurav Saini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sagar Kadam Dip
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Neha Raman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Monica Rana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Kamini Vashishta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Suresh Kumar Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sujit Kumar Tripathy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard statement

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the any of the authors.

Informed consent

Consent were obtained from the patients.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sen, R.K., Shetti, V., Mukhopadhyay, R. et al. Satisfaction and Health-Related Quality of Life Following Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Surgeries in Indian Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study. JOIO 56, 918–926 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-021-00589-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-021-00589-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation