Total knee replacement and health‐related quality of life: Factors influencing long‐term outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with osteoarthritis undergoing total knee replacement (TKR); identify the influence of sociodemographic, clinical, intraoperative, and postoperative variables on HRQOL; and determine patient perceptions at 7 years. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study with 7 years of followup. HRQOL measures (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC] and Short Form 36 [SF-36]); sociodemographic, clinical, intraoperative, inpatient, and postoperative data; patient perceptions of TKR outcomes; and physical activity at 7 years were determined. Associations were analyzed using linear regression models. RESULTS: Of 146 eligible patients, 112 (86 women, mean age 67.3 years) completed followup data. There were significant differences between pre- and postoperative WOMAC pain, stiffness, and function scores (P < 0.001). Variables retained in each of the models explained 14-32% (adjusted R(2)) of variability of the WOMAC dimensions. Obesity and postdischarge complications were associated with worse scores in all WOMAC dimensions (P < 0.05). Eighty-six percent of patients were satisfied with TKR, 80% would undergo the operation again, and 56% did regular physical activity and had better WOMAC scores (P < 0.05, except for stiffness [not significant]). Mean +/- SD SF-36 scores for men and women at 7 years were 55.1 +/- 27.1 and 39.5 +/- 22.9 for physical function, 71.2 +/- 36.5 and 51.5 +/- 42.7 for physical role, 66.2 +/- 26 and 55.6 +/- 28.9 for bodily pain, and 60.7 +/- 17.1 and 50.7 +/- 21.2 for general health, respectively. CONCLUSION: WOMAC dimension scores, especially pain, significantly improved at 7 years and were negatively influenced by obesity and postdischarge complications. HRQOL measures may help identify an increased risk of negative outcomes after TKR.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".