Patient-reported outcome measures after total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review

Bone and Joint Research

Volumn 4, Issue 7, 2015, Pages 120-127

  Ramkumar, P N ^a   Harris, J D ^b   Noble, P C ^b  

^a HOUSTON METHODIST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY   (United States)

Author keywords

Measure; Outcomes; TKA

Indexed keywords

DEMOGRAPHY; FOLLOW UP; GOLD STANDARD; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; INTERRATER RELIABILITY; INTRARATER RELIABILITY; KNEE INJURY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE; KNEE SOCIETY SCORE; NEW KNEE SOCIETY SCORE; OXFORD KNEE SCORE; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME; PSYCHOMETRY; REVIEW; STUDY DESIGN; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; WESTERN ONTARIO AND MCMASTER UNIVERSITIES OSTEOARTHRITIS INDEX;

EID: 84983554865     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20463758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.47.2000380     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. Noble PC, Conditt MA, Cook KF, Mathis KB. The John Insall Award: patient expectations affect satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 452:35-43.
2. Noble PC, Gordon MJ, Weiss JM, et al. Does total knee replacement restore normal knee function? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 431:157-165.
3. Noble PC, Scuderi GR, Brekke AC, et al. Development of a new Knee Society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470:20-32.
4. Alviar MJ, Olver J, Brand C, Hale T, Khan F. Do patient-reported outcome measures used in assessing outcomes in rehabilitation after hip and knee arthroplasty capture issues relevant to patients? Results of a systematic review and ICF linking process. J Rehabil Med 2011; 43:374-381.
5. Collins NJ, Roos EM. Patient-reported outcomes for total hip and knee arthroplasty: commonly used instruments and attributes of a "good" measure. Clin Geriatr Med 2012; 28:367-394.
6. Lingard EA, Sledge CB, Learmonth ID, Kinemax Outcomes Group. Patient expectations regarding total knee arthroplasty: differences among the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2006; 88-A:1201-1207.
7. Gandhi R, Davey JR, Mahomed N. Patient expectations predict greater pain relief with joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24:716-721.
8. Wylde V, Blom AW. Assessment of outcomes after hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 2009; 19:1-7.
9. Jones CA, Beaupre LA, Johnston DW, Suarez-Almazor ME. Total joint arthroplasties: current concepts of patient outcomes after surgery. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2007; 33:71-86.
10. Jourdan C, Poiraudeau S, Descamps S, et al. Comparison of patient and surgeon expectations of total hip arthroplasty. PLoS One 2012; 7:30195.
11. Bourne RB, Maloney WJ, Wright JG. An AOA critical issue. The outcome of the outcomes movement. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2004; 86-A:633-640.
12. Seil R, Pape D. Causes of failure and etiology of painful primary total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19:1418-1432.
13. Bourne RB Measuring tools for functional outcomes in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2008; 466:2634-2638.
14. Ghomrawi HM, Franco Ferrando N, et al. How Often are Patient and Surgeon Recovery Expectations for Total Joint Arthroplasty Aligned? Results of a Pilot Study. HSS J 2011; 7:229-234.
15. Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468:57-63.
16. Groeneveld PW, Kwoh CK, Mor MK, et al. Racial differences in expectations of joint replacement surgery outcomes. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 59:730-737.
17. Noble PC, Dwyer M, Brekke A. Commonalities, differences, and challenges with patient-derived outcome measurement tools: function/activity scales. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471:3457-3465.
18. Cordero-Ampuero J, Darder A, Santillana J, Caloto MT, Nocea G. Evaluation of patients' and physicians' expectations and attributes of osteoarthritis treatment using Kano methodology. Qual Life Res 2012; 21:1391-1404.
19. Stevens M, Reininga IH, Bulstra SK, Wagenmakers R, van den Akker-Scheek I. Physical activity participation among patients after total hip and knee arthroplasty. Clin Geriatr Med 2012; 28:509-520.
20. Noble PC, Fuller-Lafreniere S, Meftah M, Dwyer MK. Challenges in outcome measurement: discrepancies between patient and provider definitions of success. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471:3437-3445.
21. Howick J, Chalmers I, Glasziou P, et al. Explanation of the 2011 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence (Background Document). Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653 (date last accessed 10 February 2015).
22. Bach CM, Nogler M, Steingruber IE, et al. Scoring systems in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002; 399:184-196.
23. Becker R, Döring C, Denecke A, Brosz M. Expectation, satisfaction and clinical outcome of patients after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19:1433-1441.
24. Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS. The "forgotten joint" as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27:430-436.
25. Busija L, Osborne RH, Nilsdotter A, Buchbinder R, Roos EM. Magnitude and meaningfulness of change in SF-36 scores in four types of orthopedic surgery. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008; 6:55.
26. Davis AM, Perruccio AV, Canizares M, et al. Comparative, validity and responsiveness of the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS to the WOMAC physical function subscale in total joint replacement for osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17:843-847.
27. de Groot IB, Favejee MM, Reijman M, Verhaar JAN, Terwee CB. The Dutch version of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score: A validation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008; 6:16.
28. Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Translation and validation of the Oxford-12 item knee score for use in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71:268-274.
29. Eun IS, Kim OG, Kim CK, Lee HS, Lee JS. Validation of the Korean version of the Oxford Knee Score in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471:600-605.
30. Grosse Frie K, van der Meulen J, Black N. Relationship between patients' reports of complications and symptoms, disability and quality of life after surgery. Br J Surg 2012; 99:1156-1163.
31. Gonçalves RS, Tomás AM, Martins DI. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Portuguese version of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Knee 2012; 19:344-347.
32. Hossain FS, Patel S, Fernandez MA, Konan S, Haddad FS. A performance based patient outcome score for active patients following total knee arthroplasty. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2013; 21:51-59.
33. Impellizzeri FM, Mannion AF, Leunig M, Bizzini M, Naal FD. Comparison of the reliability, responsiveness, and construct validity of 4 different questionnaires for evaluating outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26:861-869.
34. Jenny JY, Louis P, Diesinger Y. High activity arthroplasty score has a lower ceiling effect than standard scores after knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29:719-721.
35. Jenny JY, Diesinger Y. The Oxford Knee Score: compared performance before and after knee replacement. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2012; 98:409-412.
36. Jenny JY, Diesinger Y. Validation of a French version of the Oxford knee questionnaire. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2011; 97:267-271.
37. Kim JG, Ha JK, Han SB, Kim TK, Lee MC. Development and validation of a new evaluation system for patients with a floor-based lifestyle: the Korean knee score. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471:1539-1547.
38. Ko Y, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, et al. Rasch analysis of the Oxford knee score. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17:1163-1169.
39. Ko Y, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, et al. Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36, the Oxford Knee Score, and the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in patients undergoing total knee replacement. Qual Life Res 2013; 22:2455-2459.
40. Liow RYL, Walker K, Wajid MA, Bedi G, Lennox CME The reliability of the American Knee Society score. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71:603-608.
41. Liow RYL, Walker K, Wajid MA, Bedi G, Lennox CME Functional rating for knee arthroplasty: comparison of three scoring systems. Orthopedics 2003; 26:143-149.
42. Mahomed N, Gandhi R, Daltroy L, Katz JN. The self-administered patient satisfaction scale for primary hip and knee arthroplasty. Arthritis 2011; 2011:591253.
43. Marx RG, Jones EC, Atwan NC, et al. Measuring improvement following total hip and knee arthroplasty using patient-based measures of outcome. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2005; 87-A:1999-2005.
44. Monticone M, Ferrante S, Salvaderi S, Motta L, Cerri C. Responsiveness and minimal important changes for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in subjects undergoing rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 92:864-870.
45. Na SE, Ha CW, Lee CH. A new high-flexion knee scoring system to eliminate the ceiling effect. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470:584-593.
46. Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Sieverding M, et al. The 12-item Oxford Knee Score: cross-cultural adaptation into German and assessment of its psychometric properties in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17:49-52.
47. Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Leunig M. Which is the best activity rating scale for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467:958-965.
48. Noble PC, Scuderi GR, Brekke AC, et al. Development of a new Knee Society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470:20-32.
49. Perruccio AV, Stefan Lohmander L, Canizares M, et al. The development of a short measure of physical function for knee OA KOOS-Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS)-an OARSI/OMERACT initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008; 16:542-550.
50. Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)-validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1:17.
51. Ruyssen-Witrand A, Fernandez-Lopez CJ, Gossec L, et al. Psychometric properties of the OARSI/OMERACT osteoarthritis pain and functional impairment scales: ICOAP, KOOS-PS and HOOS-PS. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2011; 29:231-237.
52. Talbot S, Hooper G, Stokes A, Zordan R. Use of a new high-activity arthroplasty score to assess function of young patients with total hip or knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25:268-273.
53. Toyé F, Barlow J, Wright C, Lamb SE. A validation study of the New Zealand score for hip and knee surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007; 464:190-195.
54. Van Der Straeten C, Witvrouw E, Willems T, Bellemans J, Victor J. Translation and validation of the Dutch New Knee Society scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471:3565-3571.
55. Whitehouse SL, Blom AW, Taylor AH, Pattison GTR, Bannister GC. The Oxford Knee Score; problems and pitfalls.:Knee 2005; 12:287-291.
56. Xie F, Li SC, Lo NN, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese Versions of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2007; 15:1019-1024.
57. Zhang XH, Li SC, Xie F, et al. An exploratory study of response shift in health-related quality of life and utility assessment among patients with osteoarthritis undergoing total knee replacement surgery in a tertiary hospital in Singapore. Value Health 2012; 15 (suppl):S72-S78.
58. Dinjens RN, Senden R, Heyligers IC, Grimm B. Clinimetric quality of the new 2011 Knee Society score: high validity, low completion rate. Knee 2014; 21:647-654.
59. Debette C, Parratte S, Maucort-Boulch D, et al. French adaptation of the new Knee Society Scoring System for total knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2014; 100:531-534.
60. 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.
61. Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, et al. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2007; 89-B:1010-1014.
62. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)-development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998; 28:88-96.
63. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthri-tis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988; 15:1833-1840.