M G M Schotanus1, P Pilot2, R Vos3, N P Kort4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Location Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands. martijnschotanus@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Methodology and Statistics, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Location Sittard-Geleen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the patients ability to forget the artificial knee joint in everyday life who were randomized to be operated for mobile- or fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: This single-center randomized controlled trial evaluated the 3-year follow-up of the cemented mobile- and fixed-bearing TKA from the same brand in a series of 41 patients. Clinical examination was during the pre-, 6-week, 6-month, 1-, 2- and 3-year follow-up containing multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the 12-item Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) at 3 years. Effect size was calculated for each PROM at 3-year follow-up to quantify the size of the difference between both bearings. RESULTS: At 3-year follow-up, general linear mixed model analysis showed that there were no significant or clinically relevant differences between the two groups for all outcome measures. Calculated effect sizes were small (<0.3) for all the PROMs except for the FJS-12; these were moderate (0.5). CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate that joint awareness was slightly lower in patients operated with the MB TKA with comparable improved clinical outcome and PROMs at 3-year follow-up. Measuring joint awareness with the FJS-12 is useful and provides more stringent information at 3-year follow-up compared to other PROMs and should be the PROM of choice at each follow-up after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled trial.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To compare the patients ability to forget the artificial knee joint in everyday life who were randomized to be operated for mobile- or fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: This single-center randomized controlled trial evaluated the 3-year follow-up of the cemented mobile- and fixed-bearing TKA from the same brand in a series of 41 patients. Clinical examination was during the pre-, 6-week, 6-month, 1-, 2- and 3-year follow-up containing multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the 12-item Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) at 3 years. Effect size was calculated for each PROM at 3-year follow-up to quantify the size of the difference between both bearings. RESULTS: At 3-year follow-up, general linear mixed model analysis showed that there were no significant or clinically relevant differences between the two groups for all outcome measures. Calculated effect sizes were small (<0.3) for all the PROMs except for the FJS-12; these were moderate (0.5). CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate that joint awareness was slightly lower in patients operated with the MB TKA with comparable improved clinical outcome and PROMs at 3-year follow-up. Measuring joint awareness with the FJS-12 is useful and provides more stringent information at 3-year follow-up compared to other PROMs and should be the PROM of choice at each follow-up after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled trial.
Authors: Eric H Garling; Mirjam van Eck; Tessa Wedding; Dirk-Jan Veeger; Edward R Valstar; Rob G H H Nelissen Journal: Knee Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: M G M Schotanus; P Pilot; B L Kaptein; W F Draijer; P B J Tilman; R Vos; N P Kort Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Terence J Gioe; Jason Glynn; Jonathan Sembrano; Kathleen Suthers; Edward R G Santos; Jasvinder Singh Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 5.284