Skip to main content
Log in

Does the Surgeon-reported Outcome Correlate with Patient-reported Outcome after Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Cohort Study

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

Abstract

Background

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been proved to be a successful and cost-effective treatment for improving pain and function in patients with knee arthritis. Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most common orthopaedic surgeries performed worldwide and advancement in surgical techniques and prosthetic designs have improved the patient outcomes. However, concerns and priorities of patients and surgeons relating to joint replacement may differ

Materials and Methods

306 TKAs in 223 patients were evaluated for functional outcome using surgeon reported American Knee Society Knee Score (KS)/Functional Score (FS) and patient-reported Oxford Knee Score (OKS). We have also assessed the correlation between FS and OKS at midterm follow up

Results

The mean preoperative KS, FS, and OKS in 223 patients were 42.76, 42.4, and 38.84 and the midterm mean KS, FS, and OKS were 84.29, 73.40, and 30.26, respectively. There was a statistically significant improvement in the KS, FS, and OKS at midterm follow up in Category A (CAT A) (bilateral TKA or unilateral with asymptomatic contralateral knee), CAT B (unilateral TKA with symptomatic other knee) and CAT C (inflammatory arthritis). Overall, the correlation between the midterm FS and OKS was fair. However, in CAT A and CAT B, there was no significant correlation between FS and OKS, but CAT C had a strong correlation. There was a statistically significant improvement in the KS, FS, and OKS when midterm follow up scores were compared with preoperative scores. However, no significant correlation between the American knee society FS and OKS in osteoarthritic patients at midterm follow up signifies acceptable outcome may vary between patients and physicians

Conclusion

All patients should be counseled preoperatively to assess their expectations and sensitize them to information regarding the expected functional outcome following TKA in their cultural context

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Riley LH Jr. The evolution of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976;120 7–10.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pachore JA, Vaidya SV, Thakkar CJ, Bhalodia HK, Wakankar HM. ISHKS joint registry: A preliminary report. Indian J Orthop 2013;47:505–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Lozano Calderón SA, Shen J, Doumato DF, Zelicof S. Functional outcomes in high-function-demand patients after total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2012;35:e681–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P, Paul J, Dittus R, Croxford R, et al. Health-related quality of life after knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998;80:163–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Daigle ME, Weinstein AM, Katz JN, Losina E. The cost-effectiveness of total joint arthroplasty: A systematic review of published literature. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2012;26:649–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shan L, Shan B, Suzuki A, Nouh F, Saxena A. Intermediate and long term quality of life after total knee replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015;97:156–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim TK, Chang CB, Kang YG, Kim SJ, Seong SC. Causes and predictors of patient’s dissatisfaction after uncomplicated total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009;24:263–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hwang BH, Yoon JY, Nam CH, Jung KA, Lee SC, Han CD, et al. Fungal peri-prosthetic joint infection after primary total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012;94:656–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ghomrawi HM, Mancuso CA, Westrich GH, Marx RG, Mushlin AI. Discordance in TKA expectations between patients and surgeons knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013;471:175–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:63–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sharma L, Sinacore J, Daugherty C, Kuesis DT, Stulberg SD, Lewis M, et al. Prognostic factors for functional outcome of total knee replacement: A prospective study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1996;51:M152–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988;15:1833–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the knee society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;248:13–4.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Davies AP. Rating systems for total knee replacement. Knee 2002;9:261–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Khanna G, Singh JA, Pomeroy DL, Gioe TJ. Comparison of patient-reported and clinician-assessed outcomes following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:e117(1)-(7).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Baker PN, van der Meulen JH, Lewsey J, Gregg PJ, National Joint Registry for England and Wales. The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89:893–900.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Reddy KI, Johnston LR, Wang W, Abboud RJ. Does the oxford knee score complement, concur, or contradict the American knee society score? J Arthroplasty 2011;26:714–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Scott CE, Howie CR, MacDonald D, Biant LC. Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee replacement: A prospective study of 1217 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:1253–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Noble PC, Conditt MA, Cook KF, Mathis KB. The john insall award: Patient expectations affect satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;452:35–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Gandhi R, Davey JR, Mahomed NN. Predicting patient dissatisfaction following joint replacement surgery. J Rheumatol 2008;35:2415–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nam D, Nunley R. Patient dissatisfaction after total knee replacement. A growing concern. J Arthroplasty 2009;24:e66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bullens PH, van Loon CJ, de Waal Malefijt MC, Laan RF, Veth RP. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: A comparison between subjective and objective outcome assessments. J Arthroplasty 2001;16:740–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Clement ND, MacDonald D, Simpson AH, Burnett R. Total knee replacement in patients with concomitant back pain results in a worse functional outcome and a lower rate of satisfaction. Bone Joint J 2013;95-B: 1632–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Singh JA, O’Byrne MM, Colligan RC, Lewallen DG. Pessimistic explanatory style: A psychological risk factor for poor pain and functional outcomes two years after knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:799–806.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Brander V, Gondek S, Martin E, Stulberg SD. Pain and depression influence outcome 5 years after knee replacement surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;464:21–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Park MS, Kim SJ, Chung CY, Choi IH, Lee SH, Lee KM, et al. Statistical consideration for bilateral cases in orthopaedic research. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010;92:1732–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. König A, Scheidler M, Rader C, Eulert J. The need for a dual rating system in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997;345161–7.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Medalla GA, Moonot P, Okonkwo U, Kalairajah Y, Field RE. The role of the oxford knee score and the American knee society score in monitoring the medium and long term outcome of total knee replacements: Can we reduce followup costs? J Bone Jt Surg Br 2009;91-B(Supp I):5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Clement ND, Jenkins PJ, MacDonald D, Nie YX, Patton JT, Breusch SJ, et al. Socioeconomic status affects the Oxford knee score and short-form 12 score following total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 2013;95-B: 52–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Graham B, Green A, James M, Katz J, Swiontkowski M. Measuring patient satisfaction in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015;97:80–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sivashanmugam Raju.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Raju, S., Chinnakkannu, K., Selvaraj, A. et al. Does the Surgeon-reported Outcome Correlate with Patient-reported Outcome after Total Knee Arthroplasty? A Cohort Study. IJOO 52, 387–392 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_359_16

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_359_16

Keywords

MeSH terms

Navigation