Preliminary Study on Patient-Reported Pain and Early Functional Outcomes of Robotic Arm-Assisted Versus Jig-Based Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Robotic knee replacement has gained widespread popularity globally, although the functional outcomes for patients, in comparison to traditional surgery, remain uncertain. This study aimed to compare patient-reported pain levels and early functional outcomes following robotic arm-assisted total knee arthroplasty (RTKA) and conventional jig-based TKA. The focus was on evaluating differences in pain relief, functional recovery, and postoperative scores at three, six, and 12 months. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 240 patients with tri-compartmental osteoarthritis who underwent primary TKA between January 2021 and September 2022. Of these, 120 received RTKA, and 120 underwent conventional TKA. Patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at three, six, and 12 months using the Western Ontario McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Knee Rating Scale, and Oxford Knee Score (OKS). Statistical analyses, including t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Friedman analysis of variance (ANOVA), were performed to compare differences in outcomes. RESULTS: Both the RTKA and conventional TKA groups exhibited significant functional improvements from baseline across all evaluated measures. When comparing absolute postoperative scores, there were no significant differences in WOMAC and OKS scores between the groups at three, six, and 12 months (p-values: 0.198, 0.206, and 0.446 for WOMAC; 0.465, 0.117, and 1.0 for OKS). However, the RTKA group had significantly higher HSS scores at 3 months (p = 0.032) and showed a significantly greater improvement in HSS from baseline at three months (p = 0.004) and in OKS from baseline at six months (p = 0.037). By 12 months, no notable differences in functional outcomes were observed between the groups. Patient satisfaction was high in both groups, with a trend toward greater satisfaction in the RTKA group regarding pain relief and daily activities. CONCLUSIONS: RTKA provided significant improvements in early functional outcomes, as evidenced by the higher HSS score at three months and the greater improvement in OKS at six months compared to baseline. However, by 12 months, no significant differences were observed between RTKA and conventional jig-based TKA in terms of functional outcomes and pain relief. These findings suggest that while robotic technology may enhance early recovery, its long-term benefits remain uncertain. Further research with extended follow-up periods especially in personalized alignment philosophies is necessary to evaluate the potential advantages of robotic assistance in long-term functional outcomes and implant longevity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".