An analysis of Oxford hip and knee scores following primary hip and knee replacement performed at a specialist centre

Bone and Joint Journal

Volumn 96 B, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 928-935

  Matharu, G S ^a   McBryde, C W ^a   Robb, C A ^a   Pynsent, P B ^a  

^a ROYAL ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ASYMPTOMATIC DISEASE; FEMALE; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OXFORD HIP SCORE; OXFORD KNEE SCORE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY;

ARTHROPLASTY; FUNCTION; OUTCOME; OHS; OKS;

AGED; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; MALE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85047688380     PISSN: 20494394     EISSN: 20494408     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Goodfellow JW, O'Connor JJ, Murray DW. A critique of revision rate as an outcome measure: re-interpretation of knee joint registry data. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2010;92-B:1628-1631.
2. Pynsent PB, Adams DJ, Disney SP. The Oxford hip and knee outcome questionnaires for arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2005;87:241-248.
3. Wylde V, Blom AW. The failure of survivorship. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2011;93- B:569-570.
4. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1996;78-B:185-190.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Kalairajah Y, Azurza K, Hulme C, Molloy S, Drabu KJ. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties-a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:1037-1041.
8. Moonot P, Medalla GA, Matthews D, Kalairajah Y, Field RE. Correlation between the Oxford Knee and American Knee Society scores at mid-term follow-up. J Knee Surg 2009;22:226-230.
9. Ostendorf M, van Stel HF, Buskens E, et al. Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A comparison of five instruments of health status. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2004;86-B:801-808.
10. Reddy KI, Johnston LR, Wang W, Abboud RJ. Does the Oxford Knee Score complement, concur, or contradict the American Knee Society Score? J Arthroplasty 2011;26:714-720.
11. Coulter G, Young DA, Dalziel RE, Shimmin AJ. Birmingham hip resurfacing at a mean of ten years: results from an independent centre. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2012;94-B:315-321.
12. Lisowski LA, van den Bekerom MP, Pilot P, van Dijk CN, Lisowski AE. Oxford Phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: medium-term results of a minimally invasive surgical procedure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011;19:277-284.
13. Matharu G, Robb C, Baloch K, Pynsent P. The Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement: survival and the affect of age and gender. Knee 2012;19:913-917.
14. Murray DW, Grammatopoulos G, Pandit H, et al. The ten-year survival of the Birmingham hip resurfacing: an independent series. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2012;94- B:1180-1186.
15. Pandit H, Jenkins C, Gill HS, et al. Minimally invasive Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee replacement: results of 1000 cases. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2011;93- B:198-204.
16. Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Shears E, Pynsent PB. Birmingham hip resurfacing: a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2011;93-B:27-33.
17. No authors listed. Department of Health: Guidance on the routine collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), 2009. http://webarchive.nationalarchives. gov.uk/20130107105354/http://www.dh.gov.uk/ en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/ DH-092647 [date last accessed 06 March 2014].
18. Judge A, Arden NK, Kiran A, et al. Interpretation of patient-reported outcomes for hip and knee replacement surgery: identification of thresholds associated with satisfaction with surgery. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2012;94-B:412-418.
19. Baker PN, Petheram T, Jameson SS, et al. Comparison of patient-reported outcome measures following total and unicondylar knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2012;94-B:919-927.
20. Williams DP, Blakey CM, Hadfield SG, et al. Long-term trends in the Oxford knee score following total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:45-51.
21. 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. (Pubitemid 41279131)
22. 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. (Pubitemid 47492792)
23. Treacy RB, McBryde CW, Pynsent PB. Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2005;87-B:167-170. (Pubitemid 40282567)
24. R Development Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2009.
25. Koenker R. quantreg: Quantile Regression, 2011. R package version 4.67.
26. Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet 2007;370:1508-1519.
27. Amstutz HC, Thomas BJ, Jinnah R, et al. Treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip. A comparison of total joint and surface replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1984;66-A:228-241. (Pubitemid 14150389)
28. Field RE, Cronin MD, Singh PJ. The Oxford hip scores for primary and revision hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2005;87-B:618-622. (Pubitemid 40711631)
29. Robb CA, McBryde CW, Caddy SJ, Thomas AM, Pynsent PB. Oxford scores as a triage tool for lower limb arthroplasty lead to discrimination and health inequalities. Ann R Coll Surg Engl (Suppl) 2013;95:1-4.