Hassan M K Ghomrawi1, Carol A Mancuso2, Alejandro Gonzalez Della Valle2, Christina Herrero3, Geoffrey H Westrich2. 1. Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Weill Cornell Medical College, 425 East 61st Street, Third Floor, Suite 301, New York, NY 10065 USA ; Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021 USA. 2. Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021 USA. 3. New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stiffness complaints after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are frequent, yet poorly understood and can be challenging for surgeons to address. The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a widely used measure of stiffness and can serve as a simple screening tool for complaints. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We aimed to identify a threshold for stiffness complaints on the WOMAC stiffness subscale and investigate its overlap with range of motion (ROM) in TKA patients. METHODS: TKA patients were enrolled preoperatively and followed for 6 months. At follow-up, patients reported their ROM, completed the WOMAC stiffness subscale (range 1-8 with 8 continuous stiffness) and indicated whether they experienced more stiffness than expected. To identify a threshold for complaints, we compared patients' WOMAC stiffness scores to when they experienced more stiffness than expected, visually, and statistically. We also mapped ROM limitations at 6 months to WOMAC stiffness scores. Finally, we determined if baseline characteristics were associated with stiffness complaints. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-six TKA patients were enrolled preoperatively with 82% follow-up rate at 6 months. Our results showed that patients with a WOMAC stiffness score = 3+ were significantly more likely to experience more stiffness than expected. Patients reporting full ROM (54%) reported a wide range of WOMAC stiffness subscale scores (1-6). Baseline WOMAC pain and function scores were the only factors associated with stiffness complaints. CONCLUSIONS: ROM is a poor surrogate of patient-reported stiffness, and the patients' perception of "stiffness" is clearly more complex than just ROM. We identified a WOMAC threshold that could potentially easily serve this purpose.
BACKGROUND: Stiffness complaints after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are frequent, yet poorly understood and can be challenging for surgeons to address. The WOMAC stiffness subscale is a widely used measure of stiffness and can serve as a simple screening tool for complaints. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We aimed to identify a threshold for stiffness complaints on the WOMAC stiffness subscale and investigate its overlap with range of motion (ROM) in TKA patients. METHODS: TKA patients were enrolled preoperatively and followed for 6 months. At follow-up, patients reported their ROM, completed the WOMAC stiffness subscale (range 1-8 with 8 continuous stiffness) and indicated whether they experienced more stiffness than expected. To identify a threshold for complaints, we compared patients' WOMAC stiffness scores to when they experienced more stiffness than expected, visually, and statistically. We also mapped ROM limitations at 6 months to WOMAC stiffness scores. Finally, we determined if baseline characteristics were associated with stiffness complaints. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-six TKA patients were enrolled preoperatively with 82% follow-up rate at 6 months. Our results showed that patients with a WOMAC stiffness score = 3+ were significantly more likely to experience more stiffness than expected. Patients reporting full ROM (54%) reported a wide range of WOMAC stiffness subscale scores (1-6). Baseline WOMAC pain and function scores were the only factors associated with stiffness complaints. CONCLUSIONS: ROM is a poor surrogate of patient-reported stiffness, and the patients' perception of "stiffness" is clearly more complex than just ROM. We identified a WOMAC threshold that could potentially easily serve this purpose.
Entities:
Keywords:
WOMAC; stiffness; total knee arthroplasty
Authors: Jamie E Collins; Benjamin N Rome; Meghan E Daigle; Vladislav Lerner; Jeffrey N Katz; Elena Losina Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2014-02-26 Impact factor: 4.757
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: Slif D Ulrich; Anil Bhave; David R Marker; Thorsten M Seyler; Michael A Mont Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Carol A Mancuso; Suzanne Graziano; Lisa M Briskie; Margaret G E Peterson; Paul M Pellicci; Eduardo A Salvati; Thomas P Sculco Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 4.176