Literature DB >> 29262700

Early Clinically Relevant Improvement in Quality of Life and Clinical Outcomes 1 Year Postsurgery in Patients with Knee and Hip Joint Arthroplasties.

Audrey Neuprez1,2, Arnaud H Neuprez1, Jean-François Kaux2, William Kurth3, Christophe Daniel3, Thierry Thirion3, Jean-Pierre Huskin3, Philippe Gillet3, Olivier Bruyère1, Jean-Yves Reginster1.   

Abstract

Objective To measure and identify the determinants of the outcomes after hip/knee arthroplasty (HA/KA) in patients with osteoarthritis during the first postsurgical year. Design In this prospective observational study, we evaluated the preoperative and postoperative (3, 6, and 12 months) outcomes of 626 patients who underwent HA (346 with median age 65 years, 59% female) or KA (280 with median age 66.5 years, 54% female) between 2008 and 2013. Generic and specific tools were used to measure health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and utility. Good outcome was defined as an improvement in WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) greater than or equal to the minimal important difference (MID). Regressions were performed to evaluate the relationship between preoperative and postoperative measures and evolution of WOMAC/good outcome. Results We observed an almost systematic improvement of all parameters for up to 12 months, but especially at the 3-month follow-up. The low number of comorbidities and the absence of postoperative complications were the common determinants of improvement of WOMAC total score after 12 months. Other parameters (background of the joint, preoperative function and length of hospital stay in KA group; place of discharge in HA group) affected the evolution of WOMAC scores. 87.09% of HA and 73.06% of KA patients experienced a good outcome. A small number of comorbidities, a worse preoperative function, a shortened hospital stay (KA only), and an absence of early postoperative complications (HA only) significantly predicted a good outcome. Conclusions Intermediate HRQoL following HA or KA improved quickly from preoperative levels for all instruments. More than 70% of patients achieved a good outcome defined as improved pain, stiffness and disability and the predictors are slightly close.

Entities:  

Keywords:  arthroplasty; hip; knee; osteoarthritis; quality of life

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29262700      PMCID: PMC5871126          DOI: 10.1177/1947603517743000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cartilage        ISSN: 1947-6035            Impact factor:   4.634


  73 in total

1.  SF-36 general health status survey to determine patient satisfaction at short-term follow-up after total hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  G M Kiebzak; P A Vain; A M Gregory; J G Mokris; D R Mauerhan
Journal:  J South Orthop Assoc       Date:  1997

Review 2.  Current status of cost utility analyses in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  Benedict U Nwachukwu; Kevin J Bozic; William W Schairer; Jaime L Bernstein; David S Jevsevar; Robert G Marx; Douglas E Padgett
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Treatment of knee osteoarthritis with autologous mesenchymal stem cells: two-year follow-up results.

Authors:  Lluis Orozco; Anna Munar; Robert Soler; Mercedes Alberca; Francesc Soler; Marina Huguet; Joan Sentís; Ana Sánchez; Javier García-Sancho
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 4.939

4.  Predicting the longer-term outcomes of total hip replacement.

Authors:  Rajiv Gandhi; Herman Dhotar; J Roderick Davey; Nizar N Mahomed
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 4.666

5.  Predicting dissatisfaction following total knee arthroplasty in patients under 55 years of age.

Authors:  C E H Scott; W M Oliver; D MacDonald; F A Wade; M Moran; S J Breusch
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.082

6.  Using surgical appropriateness criteria to examine outcomes of total knee arthroplasty in a United States sample.

Authors:  Daniel L Riddle; Robert A Perera; William A Jiranek; Levent Dumenci
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.794

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.  Cross-cultural adaptations of the Oxford-12 HIP score to the French speaking population.

Authors:  C Delaunay; J-A Epinette; J Dawson; D Murray; B-M Jolles
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2009-04-03       Impact factor: 2.256

Review 9.  Cartilage regeneration.

Authors:  Rocky S Tuan; Antonia F Chen; Brian A Klatt
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.020

Review 10.  The Holy Grail of Orthopedic Surgery: Mesenchymal Stem Cells-Their Current Uses and Potential Applications.

Authors:  Roberto Berebichez-Fridman; Ricardo Gómez-García; Julio Granados-Montiel; Enrique Berebichez-Fastlicht; Anell Olivos-Meza; Julio Granados; Cristina Velasquillo; Clemente Ibarra
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2017-06-18       Impact factor: 5.443

View more
  8 in total

1.  Total joint replacement improves pain, functional quality of life, and health utilities in patients with late-stage knee and hip osteoarthritis for up to 5 years.

Authors:  Audrey Neuprez; Arnaud Henri Neuprez; Jean-François Kaux; William Kurth; Christophe Daniel; Thierry Thirion; Jean-Pierre Huskin; Philippe Gillet; Olivier Bruyère; Jean-Yves Reginster
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Outcomes of Patients With Cirrhosis Undergoing Orthopedic Procedures: An Analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

Authors:  Neehar D Parikh; Yu-Hui Chang; Elliot B Tapper; Amit K Mathur
Journal:  J Clin Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.062

3.  Impact of sarcopenia on rehabilitation outcomes after total knee replacement in older adults with knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Chun-De Liao; Hung-Chou Chen; Shih-Wei Huang; Tsan-Hon Liou
Journal:  Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 5.346

4.  Marital Relationship and Quality of Life in Couples Following Hip Replacement Surgery.

Authors:  Michael Tanzer; Christopher Pedneault; Esther Yakobov; Adam Hart; Michael Sullivan
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-28

5.  The role of the lower extremity functional scale in predicting surgical outcomes for total joint arthroplasty patients.

Authors:  Justin J Turcotte; McKayla E Kelly; Alyssa B Fenn; Jennifer J Grover; Christina A Wu; James H MacDonald
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2022-02-01

Review 6.  MRI for an Acute Secondary Site Complication in Post-arthroplasty Management: Narrative Review of Safety Concerns for an Implanted Hip and Knee Joint.

Authors:  Lavindra Tomar; Gaurav Govil; Pawan Dhawan
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-02-17

7.  Patients' perceived walking abilities, daily-life gait behavior and gait quality before and 3 months after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Bas L Fransen; Mirjam Pijnappels; Ise K Butter; B J Burger; J H van Dieën; M J M Hoozemans
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 2.928

8.  Complications to 6 months following total hip or knee arthroplasty: observations from an Australian clinical outcomes registry.

Authors:  Sung Mu Heo; Ian Harris; Justine Naylor; Adriane M Lewin
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-09-10       Impact factor: 2.362

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.