BACKGROUND: The Knee Society Clinical Rating System was developed in 1989 and has been widely adopted. However, with the increased demand for TKA, there is a need for a new, validated scoring system to better characterize the expectations, satisfaction, and physical activities of the younger, more diverse population of TKA patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We developed and validated a new Knee Society Scoring System. METHODS: We developed the new knee scoring system in two stages. Initially, a comprehensive survey of activities was developed and administered to 101 unilateral TKA patients (53 women, 48 men). A prototype knee scoring instrument was developed from the responses to the survey and administered to 497 patients (204 men, 293 women; 243 postoperatively, 254 preoperatively) at 15 medical institutions within the United States and Canada. Objective and subjective data were analyzed using standard statistical and psychometric procedures and compared to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score and SF-12 scores for validation. Based on this analysis, minor modifications led to the new Knee Society Scoring System. RESULTS: We found the new Knee Society Scoring System to be broadly applicable and to accurately characterize patient outcomes after TKA. Statistical analysis confirmed the internal consistency, construct and convergent validity, and reliability of the separate subscale measures. CONCLUSIONS: The new Knee Society Scoring System is a validated instrument based on surgeon- and patient-generated data, adapted to the diverse lifestyles and activities of contemporary patients with TKA. This assessment tool allows surgeons to appreciate differences in the priorities of individual patients and the interplay among function, expectation, symptoms, and satisfaction after TKA.
BACKGROUND: The Knee Society Clinical Rating System was developed in 1989 and has been widely adopted. However, with the increased demand for TKA, there is a need for a new, validated scoring system to better characterize the expectations, satisfaction, and physical activities of the younger, more diverse population of TKA patients. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We developed and validated a new Knee Society Scoring System. METHODS: We developed the new knee scoring system in two stages. Initially, a comprehensive survey of activities was developed and administered to 101 unilateral TKA patients (53 women, 48 men). A prototype knee scoring instrument was developed from the responses to the survey and administered to 497 patients (204 men, 293 women; 243 postoperatively, 254 preoperatively) at 15 medical institutions within the United States and Canada. Objective and subjective data were analyzed using standard statistical and psychometric procedures and compared to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score and SF-12 scores for validation. Based on this analysis, minor modifications led to the new Knee Society Scoring System. RESULTS: We found the new Knee Society Scoring System to be broadly applicable and to accurately characterize patient outcomes after TKA. Statistical analysis confirmed the internal consistency, construct and convergent validity, and reliability of the separate subscale measures. CONCLUSIONS: The new Knee Society Scoring System is a validated instrument based on surgeon- and patient-generated data, adapted to the diverse lifestyles and activities of contemporary patients with TKA. This assessment tool allows surgeons to appreciate differences in the priorities of individual patients and the interplay among function, expectation, symptoms, and satisfaction after TKA.
Authors: Christian Michael Bach; Michael Nogler; Iris Eva Steingruber; Michael Ogon; Cornelius Wimmer; Georg Göbel; Martin Krismer Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Giles R Scuderi; Robert B Bourne; Philip C Noble; James B Benjamin; Jess H Lonner; W N Scott Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: C A Mancuso; T P Sculco; T L Wickiewicz; E C Jones; L Robbins; R F Warren; P Williams-Russo Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Nizar N Mahomed; Matthew H Liang; Earl F Cook; Lawren H Daltroy; Paul R Fortin; Anne H Fossel; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Giles R Scuderi; Robert B Bourne; Philip C Noble; James B Benjamin; Jess H Lonner; W N Scott Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Catherine Van Der Straeten; Erik Witvrouw; Tine Willems; Johan Bellemans; Jan Victor Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2013-07-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Giles R Scuderi; Alla Sikorskii; Robert B Bourne; Jess H Lonner; James B Benjamin; Philip C Noble Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 4.176