Patient-reported outcome measures and patient satisfaction after total knee replacement for osteoarthritis in Egyptian patients: An observational Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Together with the clinical and radiological evaluation, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a valuable tool to measure the success of TKA. This prospective study looked at the clinical outcome and patients' satisfaction following TKA using different PROM and scores at one-year post-operative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed at an elective arthroplasty unit in Menoufia University Hospitals, Egypt, on 132 patients who received primary TKA from 1 May 2021 to 1 May 2022 with a minimum one-year follow-up. All Patients received fixed bearing posterior stabilized knee TKA because knee arthritis, either primary or secondary to autoimmune disorder were included. Demographic data were collected: age, sex, weight, height, body mass index (kg/m2), comorbidities, socioeconomic status, and occupation. Three scores were used for prospective evaluation. Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score (WOMAC), and VAS (Visual Analogue Scale). During the follow-up visits, the participants were then asked to conduct their PROM (6 months and one year), and radiological and functional outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: 132 patients with mean age 58.5±8.1 (range 35 to 80), a higher proportion of the patient's population were females 105 (79.5%), the body mass index was 28.8±1.37. Comparing the results received on 6 months and 12-month follow-up visits to that recorded preoperative. significant improvement of OKS, WOMAC score, and VAS, this was seen when comparing the measures at 6 months postoperative to the preoperative,12 months postoperative to the preoperative, and 6 months postoperative to 12 months postoperatively, with significant improvement between each of the pairs (P= <0.001). Correlation between both OKS and WOMAC score at 12 months postoperative and age, and BMI. At the 12-month follow-up visit, patients who gave responses on a 4-point Likert scale, with overall patient satisfaction was 72.7% (96 patients); with a dissatisfaction rate of 27.3% (36 patients). CONCLUSION: Despite being highly successful in relieving pain, TKA does not meet the expectations of all patients, especially those with demanding levels of knee activities. PROMs that measure functional outcomes should consider patients of different cultures and lifestyles.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".