Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38058510›Full record

ArticleJB & JS open access

Assessment of Residual Pain and Dissatisfaction in Total Knee Arthroplasty: Methods Matter.

Omar Musbahi, Jamie E Collins, Heidi Yang, Faith Selzer, Antonia F Chen, Jeffrey Lange, Elena Losina, Jeffrey N Katz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 63% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Omar MusbahiOrthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4095-0989
Jamie E CollinsOrthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Heidi YangOrthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Faith SelzerOrthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Antonia F ChenDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jeffrey LangeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Elena LosinaOrthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jeffrey N KatzOrthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2104-4670
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USBoston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Residual pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) refers to knee pain after 3 to 6 months postoperatively. The estimates of the proportion of patients who experience residual pain after TKA vary widely. We hypothesized that the variation may stem from the range of methods used to assess residual pain. We analyzed data from 2 prospective studies to assess the proportion of subjects with residual pain as defined by several commonly used metrics and to examine the association of residual pain defined by each metric with participant dissatisfaction. Methods: We combined participant data from 2 prospective studies of TKA outcomes from subjects recruited between 2011 and 2014. Residual pain was defined using a range of metrics based on the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) pain score (0 to 100, in which 100 indicates worst), including the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). We also examined combinations of MCID and PASS cutoffs. Subjects self-reported dissatisfaction following TKA, and we defined dissatisfied as somewhat or very dissatisfied at 12 months. We calculated the proportion of participants with residual pain, as defined by each metric, who reported dissatisfaction. We examined the association of each metric with dissatisfaction by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and Youden index. Results: We analyzed data from 417 subjects with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 66.3 ± 8.3 years. Twenty-six participants (6.2%) were dissatisfied. The proportion of participants defined as having residual pain according to the various metrics ranged from 5.5% to >50%. The composite metric Improvement in WOMAC pain score ≥20 points or final WOMAC pain score ≤25 had the highest positive predictive value for identifying dissatisfied subjects (0.54 [95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 0.71]). No metric had a Youden index of ≥50%. Conclusions: Different metrics provided a wide range of estimates of residual pain following TKA. No estimate was both sensitive and specific for dissatisfaction in patients who underwent TKA, underscoring that measures of residual pain should be defined explicitly in reports of TKA outcomes. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Identifiers

PMID38058510
PMCPMC10697603
OpenAlexW4389438634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.