Literature DB >> 16316752

A response to issues raised in a recent paper concerning the Oxford knee score.

Jill Dawson1, Ray Fitzpatrick, David Murray, Andrew Carr.   

Abstract

In a recently published paper, authors were critical of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) patient based measure. We discuss a number of the interesting issues that this paper raised and point out some obvious misunderstandings. The OKS, whilst not perfect, has been shown in independent comparative studies to perform more satisfactorily than other measures. It remains one of a small number of measures with satisfactory measurement properties. It would be a great pity if clinicians were deterred from using the OKS on the basis of comments made in the recent publication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16316752     DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2005.08.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee        ISSN: 0968-0160            Impact factor:   2.199


  4 in total

1.  The validity and reliability of the modified forgotten joint score.

Authors:  Patrick G Robinson; Conor S Rankin; Jonathan Lavery; Iain Anthony; Mark Blyth; Bryn Jones
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-03-27

2.  Outcome after high tibial open-wedge osteotomy: a retrospective evaluation of 533 patients.

Authors:  Stephanie Floerkemeier; Alex E Staubli; Steffen Schroeter; Sabine Goldhahn; Philipp Lobenhoffer
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Follow-up of 11-16 years after modular fixed-bearing TKA.

Authors:  D Parsch; M Krüger; M T Moser; F Geiger
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-04-05       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Factors preventing kneeling in a group of pre-educated patients post total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Leigh White; T Stockwell; N Hartnell; M Hennessy; J Mullan
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2016-05-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.