ArticleActa orthopaedica2017
Good outcome scores and high satisfaction rate after primary total ankle replacement.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient satisfaction and patient-reported outcome measures after primary ankle arthrodesis: 2-year results from the Swedish Ankle Registry.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Observational
- National Trends in Total Ankle Replacement in Sweden: Demographic Shifts and Regional Disparities (2008-2023).Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Comparing Early Outcomes and Complications Between Total Ankle Arthroplasty and Ankle Arthrodesis in Patients with Ankle Osteoarthritis: Big Data Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in High-Risk Medical Device Registries: A Scoping Review.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 2024Article
- Response rates in clinical quality registries and databases that collect patient reported outcome measures: a scoping review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- Intermediate to long-term clinical outcomes and survival analysis of the Salto Mobile Bearing total ankle prothesis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Total Joint Replacement of Ankle, Knee, and Hip: How Do Patients Perceive Their Operative Outcomes at 10 Years?Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Patient-reported joint status and quality of life in sports-related ankle disorders and osteoarthritis.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Collection and use of EQ-5D for follow-up, decision-making, and quality improvement in health care - the case of the Swedish National Quality Registries.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2020Article
- Effect of Total Ankle Arthroplasty and Ankle Arthrodesis for Ankle Osteoarthritis: A Comparative Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Article
- [Progress of total ankle arthroplasty for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2018Review
- Quality measure of total ankle replacement outcomes in a non-designer centre.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose - Total ankle replacement (TAR) is gaining popularity for treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis. Large patient-centered outcome studies are, however, few. Here, we report data from the Swedish Ankle Registry. Patients and methods - We examined outcomes after primary TAR in patients from the Swedish Ankle Registry using PROMs (Patient Reported Outcome Measures; generic: EQ-5D and SF-36, region specific: SEFAS (Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score), and a question on satisfaction). We included 241 patients registered with primary TAR between 2008 and 2016 and who completed PROMs preoperatively and postoperatively up to 24 months. We evaluated changes in PROMs following surgery and estimated effects of age, diagnosis, prosthetic design, and preoperative functional score on the outcomes. Results - All absolute scores improved from preoperative to 24 months after surgery (p ≤ 0.001). 71% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied at the latest follow-up and 12% dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Postoperative SEFAS correlated with age (r = 0.2, p = 0.01) and preoperative SEFAS (r = 0.3, p < 0.001), as did patient satisfaction (r = -0.2; p ≤ 0.03). Postoperative SEFAS and EQ-5D were similar between different diagnoses or prosthetic designs. Preoperative SF-36 was associated with diagnosis (p ≤ 0.03), postoperative SF-36 with age (r = 0.2, p = 0.01) and diagnosis (p < 0.03). Interpretation - We found statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes following TAR surgery. The postoperative region-specific SEFAS was positively associated with older age. Prosthetic design seemed not to influence patient-reported outcome, whereas diagnosis partly did. Studies with longer follow-up are necessary to establish the long-term outcome of TAR and to elucidate whether short- and mid-term outcomes may predict implant failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.