Literature DB >> 26068733

Clinical improvement and satisfaction after total joint replacement: a prospective 12-month evaluation on the patients' perspective.

Florian D Naal1,2, Franco M Impellizzeri3, Ulrich Lenze4, Vanessa Wellauer3, Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe4, Michael Leunig5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine short-term improvements, satisfaction rates and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) after total joint replacement (TJR) for different patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 426 consecutive patients undergoing total hip (n = 193) or knee arthroplasty (n = 233). The following PROMs were completed before TJR, and at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery, respectively: WOMAC, Oxford Hip or Knee Score, Lower Extremity Functional Scale, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale and EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D). Satisfaction rates and the PASS thresholds were also assessed.
RESULTS: THA patients improved quicker and achieved higher outcome scores than TKA patients. Comorbidities according to the Sangha score were moderately correlated with all PROM values in an inverse direction at all time points (r = -0.27 to -0.47, p < 0.01) in both groups. Satisfaction with the result of surgery improved over time. At 12 months, more than 90 % of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the achieved result. The THA group showed a higher proportion of very satisfied patients than the TKA group at all time points. PASS thresholds increased over time for all PROMs except for the UCLA and the EQ-5D in TKA patients.
CONCLUSIONS: More than 90 % of the patients will be satisfied 1 year after TJR. THA patients recover faster than TKA patients, i.e., they achieve higher PROM values at earlier follow-up time points. Cutoff values defining a successful result in terms of the PASS could be defined for all PROMs at different time points and can serve as reference for future studies and patient-oriented follow-ups.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hip and knee arthroplasty; PASS; Patient-reported outcome; Satisfaction; Total joint replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26068733     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1042-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  44 in total

1.  Mapping the Oxford hip score onto the EQ-5D utility index.

Authors:  Rafael A Pinedo-Villanueva; David Turner; Andrew Judge; James P Raftery; Nigel K Arden
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-04-22       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores.

Authors:  D W Murray; R Fitzpatrick; K Rogers; H Pandit; D J Beard; A J Carr; J Dawson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-08

3.  The German Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) is reliable, valid and responsive in patients undergoing hip or knee replacement.

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Franco M Impellizzeri; Sebastian Torka; Vanessa Wellauer; Michael Leunig; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-08-10       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Reduced postoperative pain in total hip arthroplasty after minimal-invasive anterior approach.

Authors:  Sascha Goebel; Andre F Steinert; Judith Schillinger; Jochen Eulert; Jens Broscheit; Maximilian Rudert; Ulrich Nöth
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Outcomes after total hip replacement based on patients' baseline status: what results can be expected?

Authors:  Jose M Quintana; Urko Aguirre; Irantzu Barrio; Miren Orive; Susana Garcia; Antonio Escobar
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 4.794

6.  A comparison of outcomes in osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement surgery.

Authors:  C J Bachmeier; L M March; M J Cross; H M Lapsley; K L Tribe; B G Courtenay; P M Brooks
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.576

7.  Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A comparison of five instruments of health status.

Authors:  M Ostendorf; H F van Stel; E Buskens; A J P Schrijvers; L N Marting; A J Verbout; W J A Dhert
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-08

8.  Which is the best activity rating scale for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty?

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Franco M Impellizzeri; Michael Leunig
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-06-28       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Cost and utilization of healthcare services for hip and knee replacement.

Authors:  Chris M Kozma; Terra Slaton; Andy Paris; Eric T Edgell
Journal:  J Med Econ       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 2.448

10.  Differences in gait characteristics between total hip, knee, and ankle arthroplasty patients: a six-month postoperative comparison.

Authors:  Nicola C Casartelli; Julia F Item-Glatthorn; Mario Bizzini; Michael Leunig; Nicola A Maffiuletti
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 2.362

View more
  20 in total

1.  Editorial-Measuring Satisfaction: Can It Be Done?

Authors:  David Ring; Seth S Leopold
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  No decline in high patient satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty at long-term follow-up.

Authors:  P P Schmitz; J L C van Susante; A Hol; R Brokelman; C J M van Loon
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2018-06-01

3.  Patient expectations and satisfaction 6 and 12 months following total hip and knee replacement.

Authors:  Barbara L Conner-Spady; Eric Bohm; Lynda Loucks; Michael J Dunbar; Deborah A Marshall; Tom W Noseworthy
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Depressed patients feel more pain in the short term after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Raúl Torres-Claramunt; Pedro Hinarejos; Jorge Amestoy; Joan Leal; Juan Sánchez-Soler; Lluís Puig-Verdié; Joan C Monllau
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  TKA patients experience less improvement than THA patients at 3 and 12 months after surgery. A retrospective observational cohort study.

Authors:  Carlos J Marques; Hans O Pinnschmidt; Karina Bohlen; Juergen Lorenz; Frank Lampe
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-09-17

6.  Outpatient total hip and knee arthroplasty exhibit similar early complication rates to inpatient procedures.

Authors:  Harrison Lands; Richard Harm; Misti Hill; Kishan Patel; Jonathon Spanyer
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2021-08-09

7.  Patient satisfaction - A comparison between patient-specific implants and conventional total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Pia Reimann; Martin Brucker; Dariusch Arbab; Christian Lüring
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-04-08

8.  Patients' Expectations Impact Their Satisfaction following Total Hip or Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Audrey Neuprez; Jean-Pierre Delcour; Firouzeh Fatemi; Philippe Gillet; Jean-Michel Crielaard; Olivier Bruyère; Jean-Yves Reginster
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Gluteal muscle damage leads to higher in vivo hip joint loads 3 months after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Philipp Damm; Jip Zonneveld; Sophie Brackertz; Florian Streitparth; Tobias Winkler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Joint perception and patient perceived satisfaction after total hip and knee arthroplasty in the American population.

Authors:  Matthew Varacallo; Rajit Chakravarty; Kevin Denehy; Andrew Star
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-03-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.