Save
The Effect of Appropriateness of Indication on Patient Reported Outcomes of Total Knee Arthroplasty
Author(s):
Kaya Bicer Elcil (Turkey)
,
Kaya Bicer Elcil (Turkey)
Affiliations:
Sozbilen M.
,
Sozbilen M.
Affiliations:
Kayaokay K.
,
Kayaokay K.
Affiliations:
Aydogdu S.
,
Aydogdu S.
Affiliations:
Sur H.
Sur H.
Affiliations:
ESSKA Academy. KAYA BICER E. May 9, 2018; 209609; P10-264 Topic: Joint Replacement
Elcil KAYA BICER
Elcil KAYA BICER
This content is reserved for ESSKA members. Login or become a member here

You can access free non-premium educational content on the ESSKA Academy Portal by registering for free as 'ESSKA Academy User' here
Abstract
Discussion Forum (0)
Rate & Comment (0)
Objectives: An algorithm was developed by Escobar et. al. in 2003 to evaluate appropriateness of total knee replacement (TKR) indications. Various studies which had been conducted to this time based on these algorithms pointed out that around one third of all TKRs were based on inappropriate indications. Our findings showed that less than half of the patients in our population were operated with an appropriate indication. To evaluate the patient reported outcomes following TKR with respect to appropriate, inappropriate, and uncertain indication groups and compare them with their preoperative status.

Methods: 100 knees of 98 patients with primary osteoarthritis consecutively operated between 2013 and 2015 were retrospectively evaluated regarding to aforementioned algorithm. Having history of previous knee surgery and patients undergone simultaneous bilateral TKR were excluded. 47 of the indications were grouped as appropriate, 41 as uncertain, and 12 as inappropriate.
In this study, the preoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) of these patients were calculated based on self- filled subjective knee evaluation forms. Mean follow-up duration was 32.39 months. 82 patients (35 of them belonging to the appropriate group, 36 uncertain, and 11 inappropriate groups) were reached by phone and accepted to participate in this study. They were questioned on the phone and follow-up KOOS were calculated. Preoperative and follow-up scores as well as increments in the scores were compared between groups.
Statistical analyses were performed utilizing SPSS v 18. Multivariate analyses were conducted using ANOVA tests; for the post hoc analyses Bonferroni corrections were made. Significance level was set at 0.05.

Results: Preoperative KOOS were found to be significantly different among the three groups being lowest in appropriate group however highest in inappropriate (p<0.0001). Post hoc analysis revealed that differences between appropriate & inappropriate as well as appropriate & uncertain groups were significant (p values <0.0001). Follow-up scores of all three groups were higher compared to their preoperative status; however the difference between the groups was not significant (p=0.132).
The KOOS of the appropriate, inappropriate, and uncertain groups were increased from 41.29 ± 7.15 to 77.45 ± 8.52, 54.95 ± 4.27 to 81.25 ± 4.20, and 49.67 ± 8.87 to 80.94 ± 7.95, respectively. The comparison of the gains in the KOOS revealed that the highest increase was observed in the appropriate group. The differences among the three groups were significantly different (p=0.013). Increase of scores was significantly higher in appropriate group when compared to inappropriate (p=0.018).

Conclusions: The findings of this study showed that in our population based on patient reported outcomes the patients in the appropriate indication group obtained gains more than the others. This algorithm can be used to differentiate the ones who may benefit more than the others.

Keywords:
Knee replacement ; Arthroplasty; Osteoarthritis ; Appropriateness.
Code of conduct/disclaimer available in General Terms & Conditions
Anonymous User Privacy Preferences

Strictly Necessary Cookies (Always Active)

MULTILEARNING platforms and tools hereinafter referred as “MLG SOFTWARE” are provided to you as pure educational platforms/services requiring cookies to operate. In the case of the MLG SOFTWARE, cookies are essential for the Platform to function properly for the provision of education. If these cookies are disabled, a large subset of the functionality provided by the Platform will either be unavailable or cease to work as expected. The MLG SOFTWARE do not capture non-essential activities such as menu items and listings you click on or pages viewed.


Performance Cookies

Performance cookies are used to analyse how visitors use a website in order to provide a better user experience.



Google Analytics is used for user behavior tracking/reporting. Google Analytics works in parallel and independently from MLG’s features. Google Analytics relies on cookies and these cookies can be used by Google to track users across different platforms/services.


Save Settings