Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32228078›Full record

Trial reportThe bone & joint journal2020

Reduction in patient outcomes but implant-derived preservation of function following total knee arthroplasty: longitudinal follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

David F Hamilton, Richard Burnett, James T Patton, Gavin J MacPherson, A H R W Simpson, Colin R Howie, Paul Gaston

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The bone & joint journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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.

David F HamiltonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Richard BurnettDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
James T PattonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Gavin J MacPhersonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
A H R W SimpsonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Colin R HowieDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Paul GastonDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThere are comparatively few randomized studies evaluating knee arthroplasty prostheses, and fewer still that report longer-term functional outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of an existing implant trial cohort to document changing patient function over time following total knee arthroplasty using longitudinal analytical techniques and to determine whether implant design chosen at time of surgery influenced these outcomes.

methodsA mid-term follow-up of the remaining 125 patients from a randomized cohort of total knee arthroplasty patients (initially comprising 212 recruited patients), comparing modern (Triathlon) and traditional (Kinemax) prostheses was undertaken. Functional outcomes were assessed with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), knee range of movement, pain numerical rating scales, lower limb power output, timed functional assessment battery, and satisfaction survey. Data were linked to earlier assessment timepoints, and analyzed by repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) mixed models, incorporating longitudinal change over all assessment timepoints.

resultsThe mean follow-up of the 125 patients was 8.12 years (7.3 to 9.4). There was a reduction in all assessment parameters relative to earlier assessments. Longitudinal models highlight changes over time in all parameters and demonstrate large effect sizes. Significant between-group differences were seen in measures of knee flexion (medium-effect size), lower limb power output (large-effect size), and report of worst daily pain experienced (large-effect size) favouring the Triathlon group. No longitudinal between-group differences were observed in mean OKS, average daily pain report, or timed performance test. Satisfaction with outcome in surviving patients at eight years was 90.5% (57/63) in the Triathlon group and 82.8% (48/58) in the Kinemax group, with no statistical difference between groups (p = 0.321).

conclusionAt a mean 8.12 years, this mid-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial cohort highlights a general reduction in measures of patient function with patient age and follow-up duration, and a comparative preservation of function based on implant received at time of surgery. Cite this article:

Indexed as

Knee ProsthesisAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeDouble-Blind MethodFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansKnee JointLower ExtremityMaleMiddle AgedOsteoarthritis, KneePatient SatisfactionPostoperative PainPostoperative PeriodImplant designOutcomesPatient functionTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID32228078
PMCPMC7133720

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.