Five-year results of a randomised controlled trial comparing mobile and fixed bearings in total knee replacement

Bone and Joint Journal

Volumn 95 B, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 486-492

  Breeman, S ^a   Campbell, M K ^a   Dakin, H ^a   Fiddian, N ^a,e   Fitzpatrick, R ^a,d   Grant, A ^a   Gray, A ^a   Johnston, L ^a,f   MacLennan, G S ^a,b   Morris, R W ^a,c   Murray, D W ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^e ROYAL BOURNEMOUTH HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^f UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTHROSCOPY; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; HEALTH CARE COST; HOSPITAL READMISSION; HUMAN; KNEE ARTHRITIS; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; OPERATION DURATION; ORTHOPEDIC FIXED BEARING; ORTHOPEDIC MOBILE BEARING; ORTHOPEDIC SURGICAL EQUIPMENT; OSTEOARTHRITIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OXFORD KNEE SCORE; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REOPERATION; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

EID: 84877843460     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20494408     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B4.29454     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ranawat CS, Flynn WF, Saddler S, Hansraj KK, Maynard MJ. Long-term results of the total condylar knee arthroplasty: a 15-year survivorship study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993;290: 94-102. (Pubitemid 23059473)
2. Murray DW, Frost SJ. Pain in the assessment of total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1998;80-B: 426-431.
3. Wylde V, Learmonth I, Potter A, Bettinson K, Lingard E. Patient reported outcomes after fixed versus mobile bearing total knee replacement: a multi-centre randomised control trial using the Kinemax total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2008;90-B: 1172-1179.
4. Harrington MA, Hopkinson WJ, Hsu P, Manion L. Fixed versus mobile bearing total knee arthroplasty: does it make a difference?: a prospective randomised study. J Arthroplasty 2009: 24(Suppl)24-27.
5. Oh KJ, Pandher DS, Lee SH, Sung Joon SD, Lee ST. Meta-analysis comparing outcomes of fixed bearing and mobile bearing prosthesis in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009;24: 873-884.
6. Gioe TJ, Glynn J, Sembrano J, et al. Mobile and fixed bearing (all polyethylene tibial component) total knee arthroplasty designs: a prospective randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2009;91-A: 2104-2112.
7. Smith H, Jan M, Mahomed NN, Davey JR, Gandhi R. Meta-analysis and systematic review of clinical outcomes comparing mobile bearing and fixed bearing total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011;26: 1205-1213.
8. Johnston L, MacLennan G, McCormack K, Ramsay C, Walker A. The Knee Arthroplasty Trial (KAT) design features, baseline characteristics, and two-year functional outcomes after alternative approaches to knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2009;91-A: 134-141.
9. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1998;80-B: 63-69.
10. Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty: results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2001;83-B: 339-344.
11. Garratt AM, Brealey S, Gillespie WJ. Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43: 1414-1423. (Pubitemid 39480931)
12. Liow RY, Walker K, Wajid MA, Bedi G, Lennox CM. Functional rating for knee arthroplasty: comparison of three scoring systems. Orthopedics 2003;26: 143-149. (Pubitemid 36204216)
13. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996;34: 220-233. (Pubitemid 126433231)
14. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ 1996;5: 141-154. (Pubitemid 126484860)
15. No authors listed. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy 1990;16: 199-208.
16. Zou G. A modified poisson regression approach to prospective studies with binary data. Am J Epidemiol 2004;159: 702-706. (Pubitemid 38405384)
17. Williams RL. A note on robust variance estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics 2000;56: 645-646. (Pubitemid 30422662)
18. Breeman S, Campbell M, Dakin H, et al. Patellar resurfacing in total knee replacement: five-year clinical and economic results of a large randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2011;93-A: 1473-1481.
19. No authors listed. HM Treasury. The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government. London: TSO, 2003.
20. Briggs A, Clark T, Wolstenholme J, Clarke P. Missing... presumed at random: cost-analysis of incomplete data. Health Econ 2003;12: 377-392. (Pubitemid 36603549)
21. Royston P. Multiple imputation of missing values: update of ICE. Stata J 2005;527-36. (Pubitemid 43708457)
22. Yu LM, Burton A, Rivero-Arias O. Evaluation of software for multiple imputation of semi-continuous data. Stat Methods Med Res 2007;16: 243-258. (Pubitemid 47018661)
23. Bederman SS, Wright JG. Randomized trials in surgery: how far have we come? J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2012;94-A(Suppl 1): 2-6.
24. Cook JA. The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials. Trials 2009;10: 9.
25. Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ 2008;337: 2390.