ArticleThe Journal of arthroplasty2022
Inter-Rater Reliability of Clinical Testing for Laxity After Knee Arthroplasty.
Article in The Journal of arthroplasty, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are kneeling stress radiography and the posterior sag sign associated with subjective flexion instability after posterior-stabilized total knee arthroplasty?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Knee hyperextension is a sign of through-range laxity and may be effectively managed without routine joint line distalisation in a robotic functional alignment workflow.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Coronal plane stability of cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty in valgus gonarthrosis patients: A mid-term evaluation using stress radiographs.World journal of orthopedics · 2024Article
- Evaluation of anterior translation in total knee arthroplasty utilizing stress radiographs.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Observational
- Passive Laxity in Patients With Subjective Instability Following a Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Pilot Study.JB & JS open accessArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical examination for laxity has been considered a mainstay in evaluation of the painful knee arthroplasty, especially for the diagnosis of instability. More than 10 mm of anterior-posterior (AP) translation in flexion has been described as important in the diagnosis of flexion instability. The inter-observer reliability of varus/valgus and AP laxity testing has not been tested.
methodsTen subjects with prior to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were examined by 4 fellowship-trained orthopedic knee arthroplasty surgeons. Each surgeon evaluated each subject in random order and was blinded to the results of the other surgeons. Each surgeon performed an anterior drawer test at 30 and 90 degrees of flexion and graded the instability as 0-5 mm, 5-10 mm or >10 mm. Varus-valgus testing was also graded. Motion capture was used during the examination to determine the joint position and estimate joint reaction force during the examination.
resultsInter-rater reliability (IRR) was poor at 30 and 90 degrees for both the subjective rater score and the measured AP laxity in flexion (k = 018-0.22). Varus-valgus testing similarly had poor reliability. Force applied by the rater also had poor IRR.
conclusionClinical testing of knee laxity after TKA has poor reliability between surgeons using motion analysis. It is unclear if this is from differences in examiner technique or from differences in pain or quadriceps function of the subjects. Instability after TKA should not be diagnosed strictly by clinical testing and should involve a complete clinical assessment of the patient.
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.