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.
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.
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.
Functional Outcome of Total Knee Replacement. Randomized Clinical Controlled Trial of Novel and Conventional Implants
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of improvement in functional outcomes between a novel knee replacement design and conventional designs in 240 patients: a randomized controlled trial.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Trial
- Comparison of the thermal bone damage done by the oscillating saw and bone mill burr during total knee arthroplasty.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2025Article
- The role of the medial head of the gastrocnemius myocutaneous flap transfer in the management of prosthesis exposure and deep joint infection following total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Mid-term results of an anatomic total knee replacement design.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- RETRACTED: Enhanced wound recovery after surgery care in patients with total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis.International wound journal · 2024Review
- Smart sensor implant technology in total knee arthroplasty.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Article
- Safety of Total Knee Arthroplasty in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis and Its Effect on Postoperative Pain and Quality of Life of Patients.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
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
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.