A COMPARISON OF THREE POSTERIOR STABILISED TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENTS - IS DESIGN EVOLUTION MATCHED BY IMPROVED PERFORMANCE?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To examine the short term patient assessed functional results of the Journey BCS ¯(Smith & Nephew) and Triathlon ¯(Stryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, NJ) total knee replacements when compared to the Scorpio ¯(Stryker) total knee replacement using a multi-surgeon case control design in a single centre. METHODS From September 2006 to August 2008 a total of 135 Journey and 97 Triathlon total knee replacements (TKR) were performed. 105 patients with Journey and 90 patients with Triathlon implants were available for follow-up at a minimum of 1 year, with an average of 2 years. Age and sex matched controls were obtained from our pool of patients who had had Scorpio TKR9s. The same surgeons using the same approach operated on patients in both groups. All implants were posterior stabilised and all underwent patella resurfacing. All patients were seen pre-operatively and followed up post operatively in a physiotherapist led joint review clinic to assess range of motion (ROM) as well as function using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the High Activity Arthroplasty Score (HAAS - used post operatively only). RESULTS Each of the control groups was well matched with no significant differences pre-operatively. Post operatively the Journey showed statistically significant improvements in ROM over the Scorpio group with an average ROM 10 degrees higher as well as a 7 point mean difference in WOMAC score (p= 0.089). The Triathlon showed the largest mean improvement in Oxford knee score pre to post operatively of all the groups at 14.6 as well as higher HAAS and WOMAC scores than it9s controls although these did not quite reach statistical significance (p = 0.068) CONCLUSION Compared to a matched group of Scorpio PS TKRs the Journey BCS showed a significant improvement in both range of movement and functional scores whereas the Triathlon PS showed no statistically significant change in the same parameters
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".