Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient Satisfaction after Total Knee Arthroplasty: Who is Satisfied and Who is Not?

  • Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of the Knee Society
  • Published:
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Abstract

Despite substantial advances in primary TKA, numerous studies using historic TKA implants suggest only 82% to 89% of primary TKA patients are satisfied. We reexamined this issue to determine if contemporary TKA implants might be associated with improved patient satisfaction. We performed a cross-sectional study of patient satisfaction after 1703 primary TKAs performed in the province of Ontario. Our data confirmed that approximately one in five (19%) primary TKA patients were not satisfied with the outcome. Satisfaction with pain relief varied from 72–86% and with function from 70–84% for specific activities of daily living. The strongest predictors of patient dissatisfaction after primary TKA were expectations not met (10.7× greater risk), a low 1-year WOMAC (2.5× greater risk), preoperative pain at rest (2.4× greater risk) and a postoperative complication requiring hospital readmission (1.9× greater risk).

Level of Evidence: Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Web site: Physical Status Score. Available at: http://www.asahq.org/physicalstatus.htm. Accessed Feb. 21, 2006.

  2. Anderson JG, Wixson RL, Tsai D, Stulberg SD, Chang RW. Functional outcome and patient satisfaction in total knee patients over the age of 75. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:831–840.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bellamy N. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index: A User’s Guide IX. Brisbane, Australia: The University of Queensland; 2008:176.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bellamy N. WOMAC: a 20-year experiential review of a patient-centered self-reported health status questionnaire. J Rheumatol. 2002;29:2473–2476.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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;15:1833–1840.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bourne RB, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ, Mokete L, Guerin J. Influence of patient factors on TKA outcomes at 5 to 11 years followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;464:27–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bourne RB, Sibbald WJ, Doig G, Lee L, Adolph S, Robertson D, Provencher M. The Southwestern Ontario Joint Replacement Pilot Project: electronic point-of-care data collection. Southwestern Ontario Study Group. Can J Surg. 2001;44:199–202.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Burnett RS, Haydon CM, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB. Patella resurfacing versus nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty: results of a randomized controlled clinical trial at a minimum of 10 years’ followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;428:12–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chesworth BM, Mahomed NN, Bourne RB, Davis AM. Willingness to go through surgery again validated the WOMAC clinically important difference from THR/TKR surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:907–918.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dillman D. Mail and Electronic Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York, NY: Wiley; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:339–344.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P, Paul J, Dittus R, Croxford R, Katz B, Bombardier C, Heck D, Freund D. Health-related quality of life after knee replacement. Results of the knee replacement patient outcomes research team study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:163–173.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P, Williams J, Harvey B, Glazier R, Badley E. Differences between men and women in the rate of use of hip and knee arthroplasty. N Eng J Med. 2000;342:1016–1022.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Heck DA, Robinson RL, Partridge CM, Lubitz RM, Freund DA. Patient outcomes after knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;356:93–110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Janse AJ, Gemke RJ, Uiterwaal CS, van der Tweel I, Kimpen JL, Sinnema G. Quality of life: patients and doctors don’t always agree: a meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:653–661.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jorn LP, Johnsson R, Toksvig-Larsen S. Patient satisfaction, function and return to work after knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand. 1999;70:343–347.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kane R, Saleh K, Wilt T, Bershadsky B, Cross III W, MacDonald R, Rutks I. Total knee replacement. Evidence report. Technology Assessment (Prepared by the Minnesota Evidence—Based Practice Center, Minneapolis, MN). AHRQ Publication, No. 04-E006-2; 2003;8:1–8.

  18. Katz JN, Phillips CB, Baron JA, Fossel AH, Mahomed NN, Barrett J, Lingard EA, Harris WH, Poss R, Lew RA, Guadagnoli E, Wright EA, Losina E. Association of hospital and surgeon volume of total hip replacement with functional status and satisfaction three years following surgery. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48:560–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mahomed N, Sledge C, Daltroy L, Fossel A, Katz J. Self-administered satisfaction scale for joint replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(Suppl 1):9.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mahomed NN, Liang MH, Cook EF, Daltroy LH, Fortin PR, Fossel AH, Katz JN. The importance of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty. J Rheumatol. 2002;29:1273–1279.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mantyselka P, Kumpusalo E, Ahonen R, Takala J. Patients’ versus general practitioners’ assessments of pain intensity in primary care patients with non-cancer pain. Br J Gen Pract. 2001;51:995–997.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 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 

  23. Robertsson O, Dunbar M, Pehrsson T, Knutson K, Lidgren L. Patient satisfaction after knee arthroplasty: a report on 27,372 knees operated on between 1981 and 1995 in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000;71:262–267.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Swets JA. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems. Science. 1988;240:1285–1293.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wylde V, Dieppe P, Hewlett S, Learmonth ID. Total knee replacement: is it really an effective procedure for all? Knee. 2007;14:417–423.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wylde V, Learmonth I, Potter A, Bettinson K, Lingard E. Patient-reported outcomes after fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee replacement: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial using the Kinemax total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1172–1179.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the Ontario orthopaedic surgeons who entered data into the Ontario Joint Replacement Registry (OJRR) and the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care who funded the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University Hospital, London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, 339 Windermere Road, London, ON, N6A 5A5, Canada

    Robert B. Bourne MD, FRCSC, Bert M. Chesworth PhD, Aileen M. Davis PhD, Nizar N. Mahomed MD, MPH, FRCSC & Kory D. J. Charron Dipl. MET

Authors
  1. Robert B. Bourne MD, FRCSC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bert M. Chesworth PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aileen M. Davis PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nizar N. Mahomed MD, MPH, FRCSC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kory D. J. Charron Dipl. MET
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert B. Bourne MD, FRCSC.

Additional information

Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

Each author certifies that his or her institution has approved the human protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.

About this article

Cite this article

Bourne, R.B., Chesworth, B.M., Davis, A.M. et al. Patient Satisfaction after Total Knee Arthroplasty: Who is Satisfied and Who is Not?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468, 57–63 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation