Trial reportBMJ open2023
Comparison of the Journey II bicruciate stabilised (JII-BCS) and GENESIS II total knee arthroplasty for functional ability and motor impairment: the CAPAbility, blinded, randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bicruciate-stabilized TKA Does Not Result in Improved Patient-reported Outcomes Compared With Posterior-stabilized TKA: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Bilateral Simultaneous TKA.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Trial
- Effect of Anatomic Joint-Line Obliquity Prostheses on Coronal Plane Alignment of the Knee Alignment in a Chinese Population.Arthroplasty today · 2025Article
- Robotic-assisted bi-cruciate stabilized TKA with a 3-degree varus inclination does not affect PROMs, regardless of pre-arthritic CPAK classification matching.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Analysis of gender differences with traditional posterior stabilized versus kinematic designs in total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine if a newer design of total knee replacement (TKR) (Journey II BCS) produces superior patient-reported outcomes scores and biomechanical outcomes than the older, more established design (Genesis II).
settingPatients were recruited from an NHS University Hospital between July 2018 and October 2019 with surgery at two sites. Biomechanical and functional capacity measurements were at a University Movement and Exercise Laboratory.
participants80 participants undergoing single-stage TKR.
interventionsPatients were randomised to receive either the Journey II BCS (JII-BCS) or Genesis II TKR. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were: OKS Activity and Participation Questionnaire, EQ-5D-5L and UCLA Activity scores, Timed Up and Go Test, 6 min walk test, lower limb kinematics and lower limb muscle activity during walking and balance.
resultsThis study found no difference in the OKS between groups. The OKS scores for the JII-BCS and Genesis II groups were mean (SD) 42.97 (5.21) and 43.13 (5.20) respectively, adjusted effect size 0.35 (-2.01,2.71) p=0.771In secondary outcome measures, the Genesis II group demonstrated a significantly greater walking range-of-movement (50.62 (7.33) vs 46.07 (7.71) degrees, adjusted effect size, 3.14 (0.61,5.68) p=0.02) and higher peak knee flexion angular velocity during walking (mean (SD) 307.69 (38.96) vs 330.38 (41.40) degrees/second, adjusted effect size was 21.75 (4.54,38.96), p=0.01) and better postural control (smaller resultant centre of path length) during quiet standing than the JII-BCS group (mean (SD) 158.14 (65.40) vs 235.48 (176.94) mm, adjusted effect size, 59.91 (-105.98, -13.85) p=0.01.).
conclusionsIn this study population, the findings do not support the hypothesis that the Journey II BCS produces a better outcome than the Genesis II for the primary outcome of the OKS at 6 months after surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN32315753.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36599639What 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.