Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40398950›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2025

What proportion of people have long-term pain after total hip or knee replacement? An update of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hung-Yuan Cheng, Andrew David Beswick, Wendy Bertram, Mohammad Ammar Siddiqui, Rachael Gooberman-Hill, Michael R Whitehouse, Vikki Wylde

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Cooled radiofrequency ablation for patients with chronic postsurgical pain after total knee arthroplasty: Pilot clinical trial.Asia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The potential of [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Hung-Yuan Cheng *Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6162-4146
Andrew David Beswick *Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7032-7514
Wendy BertramBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8234-2052
Mohammad Ammar SiddiquiBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Rachael Gooberman-HillBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3353-2882
Michael R WhitehouseBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2436-9024
Vikki WyldeBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK v.wylde@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8460-1529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo update our previous systematic review to synthesise latest data on the prevalence of long-term pain in patients who underwent total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR). We aim to describe the prevalence estimates and trends in this review.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Update searches were conducted in MEDLINE and Embase databases from 1 January 2011 to 17 February 2024. Citation tracking was used to identify additional studies. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included prospective cohort studies reporting long-term pain after THR or TKR at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperative. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently identified studies as eligible. One reviewer conducted data extraction, checked by a second reviewer. The risk of bias assessment was performed using Hoy's checklist. Bayesian, random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesise the results.

resultsFor TKR, 68 studies with 89 time points, including 598 498 patients, were included. Multivariate meta-analysis showed a general decrease in pain proportions over time: 21.9% (95% CrI 15.6% to 29.4%) at 3 months, 14.1% (10.9% to 17.9%) at 6 months, 12.6% (9.9% to 15.9%) at 12 months and 14.6% (9.5% to 22.4%) at 24 months. Considerable heterogeneity, unrelated to examined moderators, was indicated by substantial prediction intervals in the univariate models. Substantial loss to follow-up and risk of bias led to low confidence in the results. For THR, only 11 studies were included, so it was not possible to describe the trend. Univariate meta-analysis estimated 13.8% (8.5% to 20.1%) and 13.7% (4.8% to 31.0%) of patients experiencing long-term pain 6 and 12 months after THR, respectively, though concerns in risk of bias results reduced confidence in these findings.

conclusionsOur review suggests that approximately 22% of patients report pain 3 months post-TKR, with 12%-15% experiencing long-term pain up to 2 years. At least 14% report pain 6-12 months after THR. Given the prevalence of chronic postsurgical pain, implementing existing and developing new preventive and management strategies is crucial for optimal patient outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023475498.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeChronic PainPostoperative PainHumansPrevalenceChronic PainHipKneeMeta-AnalysisORTHOPAEDIC & TRAUMA SURGERYSystematic Review

Identifiers

PMID40398950
PMCPMC12096998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.