ArticleThe Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons2026
Mobility Outcomes Testing Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: Improving on Subjective Outcomes Reporting: A Pilot Study.
Article in The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used to assess recovery following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) but are limited by subjectivity and recall bias. This initial pilot study introduces a novel Mobility Outcomes Testing Battery (MOTB) designed to objectively evaluate functional recovery using real-time movement and pain assessments.
methodsThirty-six patients undergoing primary TKA completed MOTB and PROMs (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Jr, Pain Catastrophizing Scale, TSK-11) preoperatively and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. MOTB included eight functional tasks (walking, sit-to-stand, stair ambulation) scored on performance (0 to 2 scale) and real-time pain (VAS 0 to 10). Composite MOTB scores were calculated by combining function and pain metrics. Dual-energy radiograph absorptiometry was used to assess body composition and skeletal dimensions. Radiographic limb alignment and demographic data were also collected. An analysis of variance was used to detect changes in measures over time, Pearson correlations examined the relationship between MOTB and standard PROM scores, and stepwise linear regression identified predictors of 6-month MOTB performance.
resultsMOTB scores improved markedly from baseline to 3 months (0.001) and from 3 to 6 months ( P = 0.008), demonstrating greater sensitivity than PROMs for detecting functional change. MOTB correlated with Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Jr. (r = 0.715, P < 0.001), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (r = -0.445), and TSK-11 (r = -0.359). Movement-specific analysis revealed stair descent as the most challenging task, with only 50% of patients achieving optimal scores at 6 months. Regression analysis identified higher preoperative lean mass and leg length as predictors of better stair performance, whereas increased body fat, valgus alignment, and cardiovascular disease were associated with poorer outcomes. Limb alignment classification (varus vs. valgus) had the strongest influence on cumulative MOTB scores.
conclusionThe MOTB offers a practical, objective, and movement-specific alternative to PROMs, with greater sensitivity to functional changes and reduced subjectivity. Easily implemented in minutes with no large equipment required, its potential in-clinic utility may enable individualized rehabilitation tracking and guide recovery by identifying movement deficits and modifiable risk factors.
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.