ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2024
Unraveling the gait dynamics - A comparative study of iASSIST and conventional total knee replacement techniques in osteoarthritic elderly patients.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) stands as the most prevalent disability among the elderly population. Assessing functional outcomes after Total Knee Replacement (TKR) typically involves Gait analysis along with other evaluation methods. The objective of this study was to compare Gait results, including temporospatial parameters, joint angles, gait profile score (GPS), and movement analysis profiles (MAP), between conventional and iASSIST TKR techniques. Method: The study involved 21 participants (mean age 68.4 ± 4.2 years), with 16 females and 5 males. Among them, 11 patients had traditional surgery (15 TKR), and 10 patients had iASSIST surgery (13 TKR), totaling 28 knees (7 bilateral). The pre-operative Gait analysis was conducted one day before the surgical procedure, whereas the postoperative Gait analysis was performed, on average, 210 ± 20 days after surgery. Gait analysis was conducted using the Qualisys Motion capture system, operating at a rate of 120 Hz. The data were thoroughly analyzed using Visual 3D C-Motion Software. Results: An analysis of gait biomechanics metrics, encompassing temporospatial parameters, joint angles, GPS, and MAP, was undertaken. Significant differences were observed in sagittal plane joint angles of the pelvis and hip, transverse plane joint angles of the knee, cadence, and MAP of foot internal/external rotation. However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two TKR techniques in the remaining temporospatial variables, joint angles, GPS, or MAP. Conclusion: This study revealed a significant difference between iASSIST-guided TKR and conventional TKR, demonstrating that the iASSIST procedure led to improvements in walking biomechanics. Findings hold potential utility for orthopedic surgeons in their decision-making processes, ultimately contributing to the improvement of functional outcomes following TKR.
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.