ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2021
Knee Arthroplasty and Gait: Effect on Level Walking-An Overview.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patient-specific versus off-the-shelf unicompartmental knee arthroplasty during level walking.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnee arthroplasty (KA) aims to restore normal gait, correct joint alignment, improve the quality of life and activities of daily living, and provide pain relief. Hence, the main purpose of this overview was to summarise data from published reviews exploring gait changes during unaided level walking post-KA, thereby providing for recommendations for future practice and research.
methodA systematic review of review (RoR) for articles published in English and since 2010, was conducted online using PubMed and Google Scholar, as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Metaanalyses guidelines. Predefined eligibility criteria were applied, and the data thus compiled were analysed. Study quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2 checklist.
resultA total of 5 systematic reviews and meta-analysis consisting of 58 primary studies were included in the review. Based on the very limited evidence, it appears that though gait does not normalize post-KA, there seems to be an improvement in spatiotemporal gait parameters over mid to long term with some decline in gains over long term. Further reviews also suggest no benefits with unicompartmental KA in comparison to healthy controls or total KA patients. Further quality of the study was found to be of critically low confidence based on the AMSTAR-2 scale
conclusionThe overview highlights the knowledge gap and limitations in gait assessment research post-KA with existing heterogeneity in methods and reporting amidst other factors within primary studies, establishing the need for further research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-020-00342-w.
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.