Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 May 5:15:145.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-145.

Comparing the functional impact of knee replacements in two cohorts

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparing the functional impact of knee replacements in two cohorts

Jingbo Niu et al. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. .

Abstract

Background: To examine if different rates of total knee replacement (TKR) in two similar cohorts with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) were associated with different functional impact of disease.

Methods: Subjects from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST) and the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI), persons with or at high risk of OA, had knee radiographs, completed Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) surveys and had TKRs confirmed at each visit. At each visit, subjects were defined as having symptomatic OA (SxOA) if ≥ one knee had pain and radiographic OA or if they had a TKR. WOMAC function scores at each visit were compared by analysis of covariance adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, race, site, depression, comorbidity, painful leg joints and knees affected. Post-TKR function scores were imputed to estimate scores that would have been present without TKR.

Results: Subjects with SxOA (n>750 in MOST and in OAI) had a mean age 66 to 67 years; most were women and were White. Subjects were followed 4-5 years. Among those with SxOA, more TKRs were done in MOST (35%) than OAI (19%). Adjusted mean WOMAC function (0-68, 68 = worst) improved from 26.9 to 21.9 in MOST and from 24.5 to 22.0 in OAI (difference between MOST and OAI in change in WOMAC function, p = .01). Estimates of function without TKRs showed function would not have changed in MOST (23.2 at baseline to 22.4).

Conclusions: Functional status of subjects with knee OA in MOST improved more than in OAI, probably because of higher rates of TKRs. The decline suggests that TKR diminishes the functional impact of OA in the community.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Secular trend of mean WOMAC function score among subjects with symptomatic knee OA#.
Figure 2
Figure 2
WOMAC function score observed in those with symptomatic OA and WOMAC function score imputed in those with symptomatic OA if there were no TKR#.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lawrence RC, Felson DT, Helmick CG, Arnold LM, Choi H, Deyo RA, Gabriel S, Hirsch R, Hochberg MC, Hunder GG, Jordan JM, Katz JN, Kremers HM, Wolfe F. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part II. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(1):26–35. doi: 10.1002/art.23176. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kane RL, Saleh KJ, Wilt TJ, Bershadsky B. The functional outcomes of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(8):1719–1724. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02714. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boutron I, Poiraudeau S, Ravaud JF, Baron G, Revel M, Nizard R, Dougados M, Ravaud P. Disability in adults with hip and knee arthroplasty: a French national community based survey. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(8):748–754. doi: 10.1136/ard.62.8.748. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nilsdotter AK, Toksvig-Larsen S, Roos EM. Knee arthroplasty: are patients’ expectations fulfilled? A prospective study of pain and function in 102 patients with 5-year follow-up. Acta Orthop. 2009;80(1):55–61. doi: 10.1080/17453670902805007. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, national Center for Health Statistics. QuickStats: rate of total knee replacement for persons aged ≥65 years, by sex - United States, 1979–2002. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2005;54:179.

Publication types