BACKGROUND: Specific anatomic differences are believed to account for gender-specific function and health-related quality of life after TKA. However, there are conflicting data in the literature regarding these gender-specific outcomes, especially as woman appear to have surgery later in the course of the disease compared with men. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked whether (1) women had worse knee function and health-related quality of life after TKA compared with men, (2) lower improvements in scores, and (3) slower recovery after surgery. METHODS: Using a cohort study design, we retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data from three multicenter randomized controlled trials evaluating rehabilitation measures after standard unisex knee arthroplasty in 494 patients (141 men and 353 women). The primary outcome was self-reported physical function as measured by the WOMAC at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the pain and stiffness scales of the WOMAC and the physical and mental component summaries of the SF-36. At the time of surgery, the women were on average older (70.8 versus 67.8 years), had lower mean physical function (55 versus 47), higher mean pain scores (54 versus 48), and greater stiffness (54 versus 46) as measured by the WOMAC. RESULTS: At the 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month followups, men and women had similar WOMAC scores. Improvements were greater for women compared with men for WOMAC function and pain subscale scores at the 3-month (function, 28 versus 23; pain, 32 versus 25) and 6-month followups (function, 32 versus 27; pain, 36 versus 31). At the 12- and 24-month followups we noted no differences in improvement between men and women. CONCLUSION: Although women had greater functional limitations at the time of surgery than men, they recover faster early after standard TKA although function is similar at 12 and 24 months. Women also had greater improvement of WOMAC scores after standard TKA than men. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See the guidelines for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
BACKGROUND: Specific anatomic differences are believed to account for gender-specific function and health-related quality of life after TKA. However, there are conflicting data in the literature regarding these gender-specific outcomes, especially as woman appear to have surgery later in the course of the disease compared with men. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked whether (1) women had worse knee function and health-related quality of life after TKA compared with men, (2) lower improvements in scores, and (3) slower recovery after surgery. METHODS: Using a cohort study design, we retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data from three multicenter randomized controlled trials evaluating rehabilitation measures after standard unisex knee arthroplasty in 494 patients (141 men and 353 women). The primary outcome was self-reported physical function as measured by the WOMAC at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the pain and stiffness scales of the WOMAC and the physical and mental component summaries of the SF-36. At the time of surgery, the women were on average older (70.8 versus 67.8 years), had lower mean physical function (55 versus 47), higher mean pain scores (54 versus 48), and greater stiffness (54 versus 46) as measured by the WOMAC. RESULTS: At the 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-month followups, men and women had similar WOMAC scores. Improvements were greater for women compared with men for WOMAC function and pain subscale scores at the 3-month (function, 28 versus 23; pain, 32 versus 25) and 6-month followups (function, 32 versus 27; pain, 36 versus 31). At the 12- and 24-month followups we noted no differences in improvement between men and women. CONCLUSION: Although women had greater functional limitations at the time of surgery than men, they recover faster early after standard TKA although function is similar at 12 and 24 months. Women also had greater improvement of WOMAC scores after standard TKA than men. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See the guidelines for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: D G Altman; K F Schulz; D Moher; M Egger; F Davidoff; D Elbourne; P C Gøtzsche; T Lang Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-04-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Kirby Hitt; John R Shurman; Kenneth Greene; Joseph McCarthy; Joseph Moskal; Tim Hoeman; Michael A Mont Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Florian D Naal; Franco M Impellizzeri; Ulrich Lenze; Vanessa Wellauer; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe; Michael Leunig Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Peter Cram; Gillian Hawker; John Matelski; Bheeshma Ravi; Andrew Pugely; Rajiv Gandhi; Timothy Jackson Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2017-03-24
Authors: Thomas Laskow; Jiafeng Zhu; Brian Buta; Julius Oni; Frederick Sieber; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Jeremy Walston; Patricia D Franklin; Ravi Varadhan Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 6.591
Authors: Young Hak Roh; Young Do Koh; Jong Oh Kim; Kyu Ho Lee; Hyun Sik Gong; Goo Hyun Baek Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Jessica L Maxwell; David T Felson; Jingbo Niu; Barton Wise; Michael C Nevitt; Jasvinder A Singh; Laura Frey-Law; Tuhina Neogi Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2013-12-01 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Lee Yaari; Yona Kosashvili; Ganit Segal; Shai Shemesh; Steven Velkes; Amit Mor; Ronen Debi; Benjamin Bernfeld; Avi Elbaz Journal: Clin Orthop Surg Date: 2015-05-18