Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31604440›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2019

Functional outcome of total knee replacement: a study protocol for a prospective, double-blinded, parallel-group randomized, clinical controlled trial of novel, personalized and conventional implants.

T Irmola, J Kangas, A Eskelinen, M Niemeläinen, H Huhtala, V M Mattila, T Moilanen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03339557 (Functional Outcome of Total Knee Replacement. Randomized Clinical Controlled Trial of Novel and Conventional Implants), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03339557 naunknown statusnot on this map

Functional Outcome of Total Knee Replacement. Randomized Clinical Controlled Trial of Novel and Conventional Implants

TypeinterventionalSponsorCoxa, Hospital for Joint ReplacementRan2015 to 2021Enrolled240ConditionsOsteoarthritis, Knee, Arthroplasty, Total Knee ReplacementArmsNexGen, Persona, PFC
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Mid-term results of an anatomic total knee replacement design.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Smart sensor implant technology in total knee arthroplasty.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

T IrmolaCoxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland. tero.irmola@fimnet.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1785-5174
J KangasCoxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland.
A EskelinenCoxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland.
M NiemeläinenCoxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland.
H HuhtalaTampere University, Tampere, Finland.
V M MattilaCoxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland.
T MoilanenCoxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland.

Funding

Government Institutional grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe development of total knee replacement (TKR) implant designs aims to improve outcome regarding pain, function, joint stiffness, instability, patellar problems, and ultimately wear of the implant. Recently, two major orthopaedic implant manufacturers launched a new generation of TKR implants which, according to the manufacturers, provide improved functional outcome. However, the benefits of these new TKR designs claimed by the manufacturers in terms of improved functional outcome still lack scientific documentation. The present randomized controlled trial has been designed to compare three fixed bearing, cemented cruciate-retaining (CR) designs; one of the new personalized TKR design with two conventional TKR designs with the main emphasis being on functional outcome.

methodsThe present study is a prospective, double-blinded, randomized, single-center intervention trial. A total of 240 patients will be recruited to participate in a parallel-group study at Coxa Hospital for Joint Replacement, Tampere, Finland. We will compare the short-term functional outcome of TKR performed with a novel personalized TKR design (Persona CR, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) against TKRs performed with two conventional designs (PFC CR, DePuy, Warsaw, IN, USA and Nexgen CR, Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA). In total, 80 patients will be randomized in each of the three study arms. The primary outcome in this study is the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), which is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). Secondary outcome measures include the Forgotten Joint Score, the 15D, the UCLA activity score, and the VAS pain scale. The results will be analyzed after 2-year follow-up. DISCUSSION: This paper presents a prospective, randomized, single-center trial study protocol. It provides details of patient randomization, PROMs, follow-up, methods of analysis of the material, and publication plan. An important aspect that will be considered in the study will be the economic effects of the novel designs as they are substantially more expensive, and the benefits of the added costs remain unknown. In addition, it is especially important to carry out evaluative studies in independent centers that are not biased by the interests of the manufacturers.

trial registrationRetrospectively registered, November, 2017, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03339557 .

Indexed as

Equipment DesignAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeCost-Benefit AnalysisDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansKnee JointKnee ProsthesisMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneeProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRange of Motion, ArticularTreatment OutcomeArthroplastyClinical protocolsFunctional outcomeKnee osteoarthritisNovel designsProspective studiesTotal knee replacement

Identifiers

PMID31604440
PMCPMC6790022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.