Contralateral knee pain reduces the rate of patient satisfaction but does not clinically impair the change in WOMAC score after total knee arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims The primary aim of this study was to assess whether pain in the contralateral knee had a clinically significant influence on the outcome of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) according to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score. Secondary aims were to: describe the prevalence of contralateral knee pain; identify if it clinically improves after TKA; and assess whether contralateral knee pain independently influences patient satisfaction with their TKA. Methods A retrospective cohort of 3,178 primary TKA patients were identified from an arthroplasty database. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, and WOMAC scores were collected preoperatively and one year postoperatively for the index knee. In addition, WOMAC pain scores were also collected for the contralateral knee. Overall patient satisfaction was assessed at one year. Preoperative contralateral knee pain was defined according to the WOMAC score: minimal (> 78 points), mild (59 to 78), moderate (44 to 58), and severe (< 44). Multivariate regression analysis was used to adjust for confounding. Results According to severity there were 1,425 patients (44.8%) with minimal, 710 (22.3%) with mild, 518 (16.3%) with moderate, and 525 (16.5%) with severe pain in the contralateral knee. Patients in the severe group had a greater clinically significant improvement in their functional WOMAC score (9.8 points; p < 0.001). Only patients in the moderate (22.9 points) and severe (37.8 points) groups had a clinically significant improvement in their contralateral knee pain (p < 0.001), but they were significantly less likely to be satisfied with their TKA (moderate: odds ratio (OR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4 to 0.92, p = 0.022; severe: OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.82, p = 0.002). Conclusion Contralateral knee pain did not impair improvement in the WOMAC score after TKA, and patients with the most severe contralateral knee pain had a clinically significantly greater improvement in their functional outcome. More than half the patients presenting for TKA had mild-to-severe contralateral knee pain, most of whom had a clinically meaningful improvement but were significantly less likely to be satisfied with their TKA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(1):125–131
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".