Construct Validity and Test Re-Test Reliability of the Forgotten Joint Score

Systematic evaluation of the degree of joint amnesia in patients after total hip arthroplasty with direct anterior approach (DAA) compared with posterior approach (PA)

OBJECTIVE

A comparative study of joint amnesia in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with the direct anterior approach and posterior approach was conducted through a comprehensive evaluation.

METHODS

The literature on joint amnesia in postoperative patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approach and the posterior approach was systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang, and VIP databases from the time of library construction until February 13, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software after independent searching, screening of the literature, data extraction, and quality assessment of the included studies by two investigators in strict accordance with the guidelines for conducting meta-analyses.

RESULTS

A total of one RCT and six cohort studies were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results indicated that at 1 month postoperatively (MD = 2.08, 95% CI (0.20, 3.96), P = 0.03), 3 months (MD = 10.08, 95% CI (1.20, 18.96), P = 0.03), and 1 year (MD = 6.74, 95% CI (1.30, 12.19), P = 0.02), DAA total hip arthroplasty was associated with better FJS compared to PA at 1 year postoperatively. However, there was no statistical significance in FJS between the two groups at 5 years postoperatively (MD = 1.35, 95% CI (- 0.58, 3.28), P = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that the degree of joint amnesia after THA for DAA was not found to be superior to that of PA. Further, these findings require confirmation by including a larger number of high-quality randomized controlled studies.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Low Ceiling Effects of the Forgotten Joint Score Compared With Legacy Measures After Joint-Preserving Procedures: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To determine, in patients undergoing joint preservation procedures, whether the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) compares favorably with legacy measures.

METHODS

Medical databases (including PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases) were queried for publications with the terms "Forgotten Joint Score" and "hip," "knee," "arthroscopy," or "ACL." Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Methodologic quality was assessed through the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist, and psychometric data were evaluated for ceiling or floor effects, convergent validity, internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness, measurement invariance, and measurement error by 2 fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons (B.D.K. and W.T.H.).

RESULTS

Data were collected from 14 studies using the FJS after joint-preserving procedures in 911 patients (959 joints). Four studies reported strong internal consistency with an average Cronbach α of 0.92. Two studies reported responsiveness with an effect size ranging from 0.6 to 1.16. One study reported reproducibility with an interclass correlation coefficient of 0.9 (95% confidence interval, 0.8-0.9). One study reported measurement error with an minimum detectable change (MDC)individual of 32% and MDCgroup of 4.5%. Studies reported moderate to very strong convergent validity across legacy measures for hip and knee preservation surgery. Ceiling effects were favorable compared with many legacy scores for hip and knee preservation. Three studies reported the minimal clinically important difference whereas 1 study reported the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the FJS.

CONCLUSIONS

The FJS is a methodologically sound outcome measure used to evaluate patient outcomes after hip and knee preservation surgery with overall low ceiling effects compared with legacy measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accuracy and could contribute to reduced pain, improved function and lower overall cost of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. However, TKR with conventional instruments may be just as effective and may be quicker and cheaper. There is a need for a robust evaluation of this technology, including cost-effectiveness analyses using both within-trial and modelling approaches. This trial will compare robotic-assisted against conventional TKR to provide high-quality evidence on whether robotic-assisted knee replacement is beneficial to patients and cost-effective for healthcare systems.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial-Knee is a multicentre, participant-assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKR compared with TKR using conventional instruments. A total of 332 participants will be randomised (1:1) to provide 90% power for a 12-point difference in the primary outcome measure; the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months postrandomisation. Allocation concealment will be achieved using computer-based randomisation performed on the day of surgery and methods for blinding will include sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will be reported in line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. A parallel study will collect data on the learning effects associated with robotic-arm systems.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial has been approved by an ethics committee for patient participation (East Midlands-Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, 29 July 2020. NRES number: 20/EM/0159). All results from the study will be disseminated using peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, lay summaries and social media as appropriate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN27624068.

A Modified Version of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 in Lower Limb Amputees: Validity and Reliability Study

Adaptation to prosthesis is important for occupation, quality of life, and participation in social life, so it needs to be evaluated. The aim of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) in lower limb amputees. The FJS-12 was applied to 80 amputees. Criterion-referenced validity was assessed using the activity restriction subparameter of Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scale (TAPES). The internal consistency of the FJS-12 was high (Cronbach's α = .943). A statistically significant very good negative correlation was determined between the FJS-12 and the activity restriction subparameter of TAPES (r = -.641; p < .001). The results of this study showed that FJS-12 is a valid and reliable measurement tool that can be used to assess the adaptation to prosthesis in amputees. Evaluation of prosthesis awareness in daily living activities of amputees is important in terms of establishing occupational therapy and rehabilitation programs.

Total Hip Replacement: Psychometric Validation of the Italian Version of Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12)

BACKGROUND

One million Total Hip Replacements (THA) are thought to be performed annually. To measure prosthesis awareness throughout daily activities, the FJS-12 patient-reported outcome scale was developed. This article's goal is to undertake a psychometric validation of the Italian FJS-12 among a sample of related THA patients.

METHODS

Between January and July 2019, data from 44 patients were retrieved. The participants were required to complete the Italian version of FJS-12 and of the WOMAC at preoperative follow-up, after two weeks, 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The Pearson correlation coefficient between the FJS-12 and WOMAC was 0.287 (p = 0.002) at preoperative follow-up, r = 0.702 (p < 0.001) at 1 month, r = 0.516 (p < 0.001) at 3 months and r = 0.585 (p < 0.001) at 6 months. The ceiling effect surpassed the acceptable range (15%) for FJS-12 in 1 month (25.5%) and WOMAC in 6 months follow-up (27.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The psychometric validation of the Italian version of this score for THA was executed with acceptable results. FJS-12 and WOMAC reported no ceiling and floor effects. Therefore, to distinguish between patients who had good or exceptional results following UKA, the FJS-12 could be a reliable score. Under the first four months, FJS-12 had a smaller ceiling effect than WOMAC. It is recommended to use this score in clinical research concerning the outcomes of THA.

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Patients Have Lower Joint Awareness and Higher Function at 5 Years Compared to Total Knee Arthroplasties: A Matched Comparison

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative outcomes at minimum 5-year follow-up in patients following unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) compared to a matched cohort of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients.

METHODS

Patients who had primarily medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) who met criteria for medial UKA underwent TKA or medial UKA between 2014 and 2015 at a single institution, matched for age, sex, and body mass index. There were 127 UKAs in 120 patients and 118 TKAs in 116 patients included with minimum 5-year follow-up (range, 6 to 8). Mean age was 69 years (range, 59 to 79) and 71 years (range, 62 to 80) in the UKA and TKA groups, respectively (P = .049).

RESULTS

Patients who underwent UKA had significantly higher mean (±SD) Forgotten Joint Scores (87 ± 20 versus 59 ± 34, P < .001); higher Knee Society Scores (88 ± 14 versus 75 ± 21, P < .001); and lower Numeric Pain Rating Scores (0.8 ± 1.6 versus 1.9 ± 2.2, P < .001). Survivorship free from all-cause revision was 96% (95% CI = 93%-99%) and 99% (95% CI = 97%-100%) at 5 years for TKA and UKA, respectively (P = .52). There were 8 both component revisions in the TKA group within 5 years from the date of surgery and 2 UKA conversions to TKA after 5-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Patients who have medial compartment OA and underwent UKA had significantly lower joint awareness, decreased pain, improved function, and higher satisfaction compared to matched TKA patients at minimum 5-year follow-up while maintaining excellent survivorship.

Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score in patients with total hip arthroplasty

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgeries are increasing; to assess quality of life after THA, an instrument that considers patient's perspective on surgical outcomes is necessary. The objective of this study is to assess the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-I) in patients with THA. The FJS-I was administered to 111 patients with THA, as well as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and the EuroQol 5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L). Structural validity [confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)], internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), test-retest reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1 )], measurement error [standard error of the measurement (SEM)], and construct validity (hypothesis testing with correlation of the WOMAC, NPRS, and EQ-5D-5L) were assessed. In addition, the minimal detectable change (MDC) was computed. The result of CFA confirmed the one-factor structure. Internal consistency was supported (α = 0.944). A high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.958; 95% confidence interval, 0.914-0.980) was found with an SEM and an MDC of 5.3 and 16.6 points, respectively. The a-priori hypotheses were fully met, determining the construct validity to be satisfactory. Psychometric properties of the FJS-I were confirmed, and it can be used for single-person assessment. Further research is suggested to refine its structural validity.

Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the Forgotten Joint Score in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

In order to better understand the clinical benefits of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and improve the interpretability of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12), the establishment of a meaningful change in score is necessary. The purpose of this study is to determine the threshold of the FJS-12 for detecting the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) following primary TKA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent elective, primary TKA and answered both the FJS-12 and the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey, Joint Replacement KOOS, JR surveys 1-year postoperatively. The questionnaires were administered via a web-based electronic application. KOOS, JR score was used as the anchor. The anchor for PASS calculation should relate pain, physical function, and patient satisfaction. Two statistical methods were employed: (1) the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve point; (2) 75^th percentile of the cumulative percentage curve of patients who had the KOOS, JR score difference larger than the cut-off value.

RESULTS

This study included 457 patients. The mean 1-year FJS-12 score was 42.6 ± 27.8. The mean 1-year KOOS, JR score was 68.0 ± 17.2. A high positive correlation between FJS-12 and KOOS, JR was found (r = 0.72, P < .001) making the KOOS, JR a valid external anchor. The threshold score of the FJS-12 which maximized the sensitivity and specificity for detecting a PASS was 33.3 (AUC = 0.78, 95% CI [0.74, 0.83]). The cut-off value computed with the 75^th percentile approach was 77.1 (95% CI [73.9, 81.5]).

CONCLUSION

The PASS threshold for the FJS-12 was 33.3 and 77.1 at 1-year follow-up after primary TKA using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and 75^th percentile approaches, respectively. These values can be used to assess the successful achievement of a forgotten joint.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study.

Early Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Partial Versus Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Debate still exists regarding the benefits of unicompartmental (UKA) versus total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for the treatment of medial compartment osteoarthritis. The purpose of this randomized trial is to compare the early outcomes of UKA versus TKA.

METHODS

One-hundred and seven candidates for UKA were randomized at two centers; 57 candidates received UKA and 50 received TKA. Six-week and 6-month outcome measures including Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR), Knee Society Score (KSS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), and VR-12 global health scores were obtained. No demographic or baseline patient reported outcome (PRO) differences were present suggesting successful randomization (P > .05).

RESULTS

UKA demonstrated shorter operative times (UKA = 65 minutes, TKA = 74 minutes; P < .001) and length of stay (UKA = 0.7 nights, TKA = 1.2 nights; P < .01). At 6 weeks, there were no differences in KOOS, JR (P = .755), KSS (P = .754), FJS (P = .664), or PRO change from preoperative scores (P = .468). There were three surgical complications within 90 days in each group. The duration of opioid consumption (UKA = 33.8 days, TKA = 28.5 days; P = .290) and return to work (UKA = 57.1 days, TKA = 47.3 days; P = .346) did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

Data suggest no clinically significant differences between UKA and TKA in the early postoperative period in regards to patient-reported outcome measures, duration of opioid use, or return to work. Patients undergoing UKA can anticipate a shorter length of stay and greater early range of motion. All-cause short-term complications may be more prevalent with TKA.

Comparison of the clinical and patient-reported outcomes between medial stabilized and posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is effective in relieving pain and improving function in patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis. Both medial stabilized total knee arthroplasty (MS-TKA) and posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty (PS-TKA) can achieve satisfactory clinical results, but comparisons between MS-TKA and PS-TKA have yielded contradictory conclusions. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to investigate the differences in clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) between MS-TKA and PS-TKA.

METHODS

In December 2020, systematic searches of the following databases were undertaken: Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials.gov. Studies with PROMs comparing MS-TKA to PS-TKA were included. Meta-analysis was conducted for range of motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Society Functional Score (KFS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Oxford Knee Score (OKS).

RESULTS

There were 17 studies included in this review, 13 studies used for quantitative analysis, and 4 studies used for qualitative synthesis. Meta-analysis concluded that the WOMAC mean difference (MD) for MS-TKA was 1.55 higher than for PS-TKA (MD = -1.55; 95 %CI = -2.45 to -0.64, P = 0.0008); however, this difference was less than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) value of 15. Assessment using the OKS determined that the MD for PS-TKA was 0.58 higher than for MS-TKA (MD = 0.58; 95 %CI = 0.25 to 0.91, P = 0.0006); again, this MD was less than the MCID value of 5. There were no significant differences between MS-TKA and PS-TKA when assessed by ROM (P = 0.23), KSS (P = 0.13), KFS (P = 0.61), or FJS (P = 0.22).

CONCLUSION

Derived from numerous sources, utilizing a multitude of validated functional and patient-reported outcome assessment tools, there was no clinically evident advantage of MS-TKA compared to PS-TKA.

REGISTRATION

The registration number on PROSPERO is CRD42021228555.

The Forgotten Joint Score patient-acceptable symptom state following primary total hip arthroplasty

Aims

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) tool designed to assess artificial prosthesis awareness during daily activities following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) is the minimum cut-off value that corresponds to a patient’s satisfactory state-of-health. Despite the validity and reliability of the FJS-12 having been previously demonstrated, the PASS has yet to be clearly defined. This study aims to define the PASS of the FJS-12 following primary THA.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent primary elective THA from 2019 to 2020, and answered both the FJS-12 and the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR) questionnaires one-year postoperatively. HOOS, JR score was used as the anchor to estimate the PASS of FJS-12. Two statistical methods were employed: the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve point, which maximized the Youden index; and 75th percentile of the cumulative percentage curve of patients who had the HOOS, JR score difference larger than the cut-off value.

Results

This study included 780 patients. The mean one-year FJS-12 score was 65.42 (SD 28.59). The mean one-year HOOS, JR score was 82.70 (SD 16.57). A high positive correlation between FJS-12 and HOOS, JR was found (r = 0.74; p<0.001), making the HOOS, JR a valid external anchor. The threshold score of the FJS-12 that maximized the sensitivity and specificity for detecting a PASS was 66.68 (area under the curve = 0.8). The cut-off score value computed with the 75th percentile approach was 92.20.

Conclusion

The PASS threshold for the FJS-12 at one year following primary THA was 66.68 and 92.20 using the ROC curve and 75th percentile approaches, respectively. These values can be used to achieve consensus about meaningful postoperative improvement to maximize the utility of the FJS-12 to evaluate and counsel patients undergoing THA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(4):307–313.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 is valid and reliable to assess prosthesis awareness

PURPOSE

Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) recorded an increased incidence of around 30% per year in the United States. Patient's experience and satisfaction after surgery were traditionally assessed by pre, and post-surgical scores and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) scales. Traditional scales as Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) reported high ceiling effect. Patients treated by UKA usually perform well; therefore, it is necessary to have a PROMs' scale with a low ceiling effect as the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12). PROMs have to be validated in the local language to be used. This study aims to perform a psychometric validation of the Italian version of FJS-12 for UKA for the first time.

METHODS

Between January 2019 and October 2019, 44 patients were included. Each patient completed both the FJS-12 Italian version and the WOMAC Italian version in preoperative follow-up, after 2-week and 1-month, 3-month, and 6-month postoperative follow-up. Cronbach's α, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC) were calculated to evaluate the reliability. The Pearson coefficient was used to assess validity. The Effect Size (ES) was used to test the responsiveness.

RESULTS

A range of Cronbach's α between 0.90 and 0.95 indicated good internal consistency for the FJS-12. The test-retest reliability was acceptable (i.e., the ICC was higher than 0.7) at each follow-up. The Pearson correlation coefficient between the FJS-12 and WOMAC was - 0.11 (n.s.) at preoperative follow-up, r = 0.47 (P = 0.001) at 1 month, r = 0.57 (P < 0.001) at 3 months, and r = 0.57 (P < 0.001) at 6 months. Therefore, except for the preoperative period, the validity of the FJS-12 score was assessed.

CONCLUSION

The FJS-12 represents a valid and reliable tool with a low ceiling effect to assess the outcomes improvement in UKA patients. Therefore, validating and translating this score in different languages could help perform more accurate studies on outcomes after UKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, diagnostic study.

The influence of obesity on achievement of a 'forgotten joint' following total knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Obesity has been associated with poorer outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA); however, data remain sparse on its impact on patients' joint awareness following surgery. This study aims to investigate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on improvement in outcomes following TKA as assessed by the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 1075 patients who underwent primary TKA from 2017 to 2020 with available postoperative FJS-12 scores. Patients were stratified based on their BMI (kg/m²): < 30, 30.0-34.9 (obese class I), 35.0-39.9 (obese class II), and ≥ 40 (obese class III). FJS-12 and KOOS, JR scores were collected at various time points. Demographic differences were assessed with Chi-square and ANOVA tests. Mean scores between BMI groups were compared using univariate ANCOVA, controlling for observed demographic differences.

RESULTS

Of the 1075 patients included, there were 457 with a BMI < 30, 331 who were obese class I, 162 obese class II, and 125 obese class III. There were no statistical differences in FJS-12 scores between the BMI groups at 3 months (27.24 vs. 25.33 vs. 23.57 vs. 22.48; p = 0.99), 1 year (45.07 vs. 41.86 vs. 40.51 vs. 36.22; p = 0.92) and 2 years (51.31 vs. 52.86 vs. 46.17 vs. 44.97; p = 0.94). Preoperative KOOS, JR scores significantly differed between the various BMI categories (49.33 vs. 46.63 vs. 44.24 vs. 39.33; p < 0.01); however, 3-month (p = 0.20) and 1-year (p = 0.13) scores were not statistically significant. Mean improvement in FJS-12 scores from 3 months to 2 years was statistically greatest for obese class I patients and lowest for obese class III patients (24.07 vs. 27.53 vs. 22.60 vs. 22.49; p = 0.01). KOOS, JR score improvement from baseline to 1 year was statistically greatest for obese class III patients and lowest for non-obese patients (22.34 vs. 25.49 vs. 23.77 vs. 27.58; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

While all groups demonstrated postoperative improvement, those with higher BMI reported lower mean FJS-12 scores but these differences were not found to be significant. Our study showed no significant impact of BMI on postoperative joint awareness, which implies that obese patients, in all obesity classes, experience similar functional improvement following TKA.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study.

Joint awareness and return to pre-injury level of activities after ACL reconstruction in athletes vs non-athletes

PURPOSE

The outcome of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the non-athlete population is under-reported. The study aimed to compare the functional outcomes of ACLR in the non-athlete and athlete population by patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)- International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Lysholm knee scoring scale, Forgotten joint score (FJS-12) and return to pre-injury activity level. The study also correlated the FJS-12 score with other commonly used PROM's (IKDC and Lysholm).

METHODS

This was a prospective comparative study including patients undergoing ACLR. Patients were divided into two groups. Group-1 (non-athletes) and Group-2 (athletes, defined as those with pre-injury Tegner activity level > 5). Demographic profile, management of associated meniscal injury, perioperative and midterm complications were noted. All patients had 24 months follow-up. Knee laxity assessment by pivot shift test, functional outcome scores (Lysholm and IKDC) and FJS-12 were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 12 and 24 months.

RESULTS

Group 1 and 2 included 69 and 47 participants, respectively, (total 116 patients). The mean age of group 1 was significantly higher than group 2 (33.1 ± 8.0 vs 25.0 ± 4.9 years; p < 0.005). There was no statistically significant difference in PROMs and FJS-12 scores between the groups at any follow-up. Return to pre-injury Tegner activity level post-ACLR was 88.4% (n = 61) and 46.8% (n = 22) in group 1 and 2, respectively (p). The ceiling effect in FJS-12, IKDC, and Lysholm scores were achieved by 9.3%, 19.5%, and 34.7% of patients (n = 116), respectively, at 2-year follow-up. The ceiling effect of FJS-12, Lysholm, and IKDC scores between the groups at final follow-up was not statistically significant (p = 1, p = .524, p = .09, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The functional outcome of ACLR was comparable between athletes and non-athletes. FJS-12 has a lower ceiling effect and better discriminatory power than Lysholm and IKDC scores. FJS-12 score can be satisfactorily used in ACLR to observe and monitor changes in patient satisfaction and outcome.

LEVEL OF STUDY

II, Prospective comparative study.

No Difference in Postoperative Knee Flexion and Patient Joint Awareness Between Cruciate-Substituting and Cruciate-Retaining Medial Pivot Total Knee Prostheses: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to clarify differences in clinical results, including in patients' joint awareness, between cruciate-substituting (CS) and cruciate-retaining (CR) medial pivot total knee arthroplasty (TKA) over a 10-year follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 333 TKAs were included in this study. There were 257 cases of CS and 76 cases of CR TKAs. Knee range of motion, Knee Society Score, and radiological outcomes were assessed. The patients' joint awareness was evaluated using the Forgotten Joint Score-12 at the final follow-up. The survival rate with respect to reoperation or revision was analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 10 ± 1.7 years, and the loss to follow-up was 5.4%. All clinical outcomes improved significantly after surgery in both groups (P < .001). Postoperative knee flexion was 118° ± 13° in the CS group and 116° ± 10° in the CR group (P = .10). The mean Forgotten Joint Score-12 scores were 57 ± 27 points in the CS group and 56 ± 28 points in the CR group (P = .59). Ten years after the operation, the survival rates for reoperation were 96.3% in the CS group and 94.2% in the CR group (P = .61), and those for revision were 98.4% and 98.7% in the CS and CR groups, respectively (P = .87). Other postoperative clinical results did not differ between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

In this 10-year follow-up study, medial pivot TKA, regardless of polyethylene insert type, showed a high survival rate and good patient awareness of the prosthetic joint.

No difference in patient-reported satisfaction after 12 months between customised individually made and off-the-shelf total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

A subset of patients is usually not satisfied after a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Customised individually made (CIM) TKA are deemed to overcome drawbacks of classical off-the-shelf (OTS) TKA, but evidence is still sparse. The aim of this study was to compare satisfaction of patients with CIM and OTS TKA.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study compared clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) between patients with CIM and OTS TKA. The primary outcome was patient satisfaction after 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the Knee Society Score (KSS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) and the EQ-5D-3L after 4 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Data were analysed from 74 CIM TKA and 169 OTS TKA between January 2017 and September 2020. Patients with CIM TKA were slightly younger, more often male, had a lower body mass index, a lower KSS and partially higher preoperative PROMs. Patient satisfaction after 12 months was high and comparable (CIM 87%, OTS 89%). All PROMs improved for both groups (p < 0.001) and did not differ after 12 months (p > 0.063). The majority of patients improved above the minimal important difference (range 65 to 89%) and reported a clear overall improvement (CIM 86%, OTS 87%). The postoperative KSS, notably regarding knee stability, was higher for CIM TKA (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

No difference was found in patient satisfaction between CIM and OTS TKA after 12 months. In both groups, patient satisfaction was high and PROMs improved considerably.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, prospective cohort study.

Changes and thresholds in the Forgotten Joint Score after total hip arthroplasty : minimal clinically important difference, minimal important and detectable changes, and patient-acceptable symptom state

AIMS

The aim of this study was to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal important change (MIC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) in the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) according to patient satisfaction six months following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in a UK population.

METHODS

During a one-year period, 461 patients underwent a primary THA and completed preoperative and six-month FJS, with a mean age of 67.2 years (22 to 93). At six months, patient satisfaction was recorded as very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. The difference between patients recording neutral (n = 31) and satisfied (n = 101) was used to define the MCID. MIC for a cohort was defined as the change in the FJS for those patients declaring their outcome as satisfied, whereas receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the MIC for an individual and the PASS. Distribution-based methodology was used to calculate the MDC.

RESULTS

Using satisfaction as the anchor, the MCID for the FJS was 8.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.7 to 15.9; p = 0.040), which was affirmed when adjusting for confounding. The MIC for the FJS for a cohort of patients was 17.7 (95% CI 13.7 to 21.7) and for an individual patient was 18. The MDC90 for the FJS was eight, meaning that 90% of patients scoring more than this will have experienced a real change that is beyond measurement error. The PASS threshold for the FJS was defined as 29.

CONCLUSION

The MCID and MIC can be used respectively to assess whether there is a clinical difference between two groups, or whether a cohort or patient has had a meaningful change in their FJS. Both values were greater than measurement error (MDC90), suggesting a real change. The PASS threshold for the postoperative FJS can be used as a marker of achieving patient satisfaction following THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(12):1759-1765.

Good Validity and High Internal Consistency of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 in Patients After Medial Opening Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy

BACKGROUND

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) was originally developed to assess awareness of an artificial joint. Medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO), an alternative surgical method of knee replacement, is a joint-preservation surgery; therefore, joint awareness should be used to evaluate its clinical results. However, FJS-12 has not been validated as a tool to evaluate the postoperative results of MOWHTO. This study aimed to validate FJS-12 in MOWHTO.

METHODS

Patients with bilateral knee surgery, previous knee surgery, flexion contracture >15°, varus alignment >20°, and patients without plate removal surgery were excluded. Finally, 71 knees of 71 patients were analyzed, with a mean follow-up of 34.5 months. The FJS-12 score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were obtained, and the floor and ceiling effect of each score was investigated. Cronbach's α was calculated to determine the internal consistency of FJS-12. Spearman's correlation coefficients between FJS-12 and KOOS were calculated to assess convergent validity.

RESULTS

There were ceiling effects in 3 KOOS subscales (symptoms [25.4%], pain [15.5%], and activities of daily living [25.4%]) but not in FJS-12 (8.5%). No floor effect was noted in any patient-reported outcome measures. The total Cronbach's α was 0.9457 in FJS-12. FJS-12 showed moderate-to-strong positive correlations with all KOOS subscales (r = 0.64-0.72).

CONCLUSION

FJS-12 showed a lower ceiling effect than KOOS and high internal consistency and convergent validity in patients following MOWHTO. With its low ceiling effect, FJS-12 was found to be useful for evaluating patients following MOWHTO.

Impact of Preoperative Opioid Use on Patient Outcomes Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether preoperative opioid use had any effect on clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) before and after primary, elective total hip arthroplasty (THA). The authors retrospectively reviewed 793 patients who underwent primary THA from November 2018 to March 2020 with available PROMs. Patients were stratified into two groups based on whether or not they were taking opioids preoperatively. Demographics, clinical data, and PROMs (Forgotten Joint Score-12 [FJS-12], Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement [HOOS, JR], and Veterans RAND 12 [VR-12] Physical Component Score [PCS] and Mental Component Score [MCS]) were collected at various time periods. Demographic differences were assessed with chi-square and independent sample t tests. Clinical data and PROMs were compared using multilinear regressions. Seventy-five (10%) patients were preoperative opioid users and 718 (90%) were not. Preoperative opioid users had a longer stay (1.37 vs 1.07 days; P=.030), a longer surgical time (102.44 vs 90.20 minutes; P=.001), and higher all-cause postoperative emergency department visits (6.7% vs 2.1%; P=.033) compared with patients not taking opioids preoperatively. Preoperative HOOS, JR (46.63 vs 51.26; P=.009), VR-12 PCS (27.79 vs 31.53; P<.001), and VR-12 MCS (46.24 vs 49.33; P=.044) were significantly lower for preoperative opioid users, but 3-month and 1-year postoperative scores were not statistically different. At 3 months and 1 year, FJS-12 scores did not differ significantly. Mean improvement preoperatively to 1 year in HOOS, JR values exceeded the minimal clinically important difference, with preoperative opioid users experiencing a greater improvement (36.50 vs 33.11; P=.008). Preoperative opioid users had a longer stay, a longer surgical time, and higher all-cause emergency department visits compared with preoperatively opioid naïve patients. Although preoperative opioid users reported significantly lower preoperative PROMs, they did not statistically differ postoperatively, which indicates a larger delta improvement and similar benefits following THA. [Orthopedics. 2021;44(2):77-84.].

Does the Use of Intraoperative Technology Yield Superior Patient Outcomes Following Total Knee Arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

There is debate regarding whether the use of computer-assisted technology, such as navigation and robotics, has any benefit on outcomes or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aims to report on the association between intraoperative use of technology and outcomes in patients who underwent primary TKA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 7096 patients who underwent primary TKA from 2016-2020. Patients were stratified depending on the technology utilized: navigation, robotics, or no technology. Patient demographics, clinical data, Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS), and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) were collected at various time points up to 1-year follow-up. Demographic differences were assessed with chi-square and ANOVA. Clinical data and PROMs were compared using univariate ANCOVA, controlling for demographic differences.

RESULTS

A total of 287(4%) navigation, 367(5%) robotics, and 6442(91%) manual cases were included. Surgical-time significantly differed between the three groups (113.33 vs 117.44 vs 102.11; P < .001). Discharge disposition significantly differed between the three groups (P < .001), with more manual TKA patients discharged to a skilled nursing facility (12% vs 8% vs 15%; P < .001) than those who had technology utilized. FJS scores did not statistically differ at three-months (P = .067) and one-year (P = .221). We found significant statistical differences in three-month KOOS, JR scores (59.48 vs 60.10 vs 63.64; P = .001); however, one-year scores did not statistically differ between all groups (P = .320).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates shorter operative-time in cases with no utilization of technology and clinically similar PROMs associated with TKAs performed between all modalities. While the use of technology may aid surgeons, it has not currently translated to better short-term outcomes.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort.

Presence of back pain prior total knee arthroplasty and its effects on short-term patient-reported outcome measures

PURPOSE

Back pain may both decrease patient satisfaction after TKA and confound outcome assessment in satisfied patients. Our primary objective was to determine whether preoperative back pain is associated with differences in postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 234 primary TKA patients who completed PROMs preoperatively and 12 weeks postoperatively, which included a back pain questionnaire, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR) and the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12). Cohorts were defined based on the severity of preoperative back pain (none, mild, moderate and severe) and compared. Demographics were compared using ANOVA and Chi-square analysis. Univariate ANCOVA analysis was utilized to compare PROMs while accounting for significant demographic differences.

RESULTS

Both preoperative KOOS JR scores (none: 47.90, mild: 47.61, moderate: 44.61 and severe: 38.70; p = 0.013) and 12-week postoperative KOOS JR scores (none: 61.24, mild: 64.94, moderate: 57.48 and severe: 57.01; p = 0.012) had a statistically significant inverse relationship with regard to the intensity of preoperative back pain. Although FJS-12 scores at the 12-week postoperative period trended lower with increasing levels of preoperative back pain (p = 0.362), it did not reach statistical significance. Patients who reported severe back pain preoperatively achieved the largest delta improvement from baseline compared to those with lesser pain intensity (p = 0.003). Patients who had a 2-grade improvement in their back pain achieved significantly higher KOOS JR scores 12 weeks postoperatively compared to patients with either 1-grade or no improvement (63.53 vs. 55.98; p = 0.042). Both preoperative (47.99 vs. 41.11; p = 0.003) and 12-week postoperative (64.06 vs. 55.73; p < 0.001) KOOS JR scores were statistically higher for those who reported mild or no back pain pre-and postoperatively than those who reported moderate or severe back pain pre-and postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Knee pain and back pain both exert negative effects on outcome instruments designed to measure pain and function. Although mean improvement from pre- to postoperative KOOS JR scores for patients with severe pre-existing back pain was higher than their counterparts, this statistical difference is likely not clinically significant. This implies that all patients may experience similar benefits from TKA despite the presence or absence of back pain. Attempts to measure TKA outcomes using PROMs should seek to control for lumbago and other sources of body pain. Level of Evidence IIIRetrospective Cohort Study.

Meaningful values in the Forgotten Joint Score after total knee arthroplasty

AIMS

The aim of this study was to identify the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), minimal important change (MIC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) threshold in the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) according to patient satisfaction six months following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

During a one-year period 484 patients underwent a primary TKA and completed preoperative and six-month FJS and OKS. At six months patients were asked, "How satisfied are you with your operated knee?" Their response was recorded as: very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied. The difference between patients recording neutral (n = 44) and satisfied (n = 153) was used to define the MCID. MIC for a cohort was defined as the change in the FJS for those patients declaring their outcome as satisfied, whereas receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the MIC for an individual and the PASS threshold. Distribution-based methodology was used to calculate the MDC.

RESULTS

Using satisfaction as the anchor question, the MCID for the FJS was 16.6 (95% confidence interval (CIs) 8.9 to 24.3; p < 0.001) and when adjusting for confounding this decreased to 13.7 points (95% CI 4.8 to 22.5; p < 0.001). The MIC for the FJS for a cohort of patients was 17.7 points and for an individual patient was 10 points. The MDC90 for the FGS was 12 points; where 90% of patients scoring more than this will have experienced a real change that is beyond measurement error. The PASS was defined as 22 points or more in the postoperative FJS.

CONCLUSION

The estimates for MCID and MIC can be used to assess whether there is clinical difference between two groups and whether a cohort/patient has had a meaningful change in their FJS, respectively. The MDC90 of 12 points suggests a value lower than this may fall within measurement error. A postoperative FJS of 22 or more was predictive of achieving PASS. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):846-854.

The ceiling effects of patient reported outcome measures for total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) that exhibit a substantial ceiling effect show clustering of participant's scores towards the upper limit of a scale and consequently have low discriminatory power among high end scores. This study aimed to compare ceiling effects at 1 and 2 years postoperatively across commonly usedPROMs for TKA.

HYPOTHESIS

We hypothesized, that the analyzed PROMs differ substantially in regards to their ceiling effect.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients that underwent a primary unilateral TKA and completed pre-operative and post-operative questionnaires were included in the analysis. Participants completed the KOOS, KOOS-12, KOOS-JR, KOOS-PS, WOMAC and OKS preoperatively, and completed the KOOS, KOOS-12, KOOS-JR, KOOS-PS, WOMAC,OKS and FJS postoperatively at 1 and 2 years.

RESULTS

1-year and 2-year follow-up data was available for 380 and 193 patients, respectively. The preoperative mean age was 68.0 (8.5) and mean BMI was 31.4kg/m² (6.6), with a male to female ratio of 49.6% to 50.4%. At 1 year postoperatively, a ceiling effect was seen for the Pain and ADL subscales of the KOOS and the KOOS JR. The KOOS Pain, Symptoms, ADL and QoL subscales, the WOMAC Total and KOOS JR exhibited a ceiling effect at 2 years postoperatively. We found 9.0% and 14.8% of patients achieving a maximum score in the FJS at 1 and 2 years, respectively, indicating the absence of a substantial ceiling effect.

CONCLUSION

The PROMs studied differ substantially with regards to their ceiling effect and consequently their ability to detect differences between well performing groups. The KOOS Pain, Symptoms, ADL and QoL subscales, the WOMAC Total and KOOS JR exhibited a substantial ceiling effect at 2 years postoperatively. We recommend using PROMs like the FJS and KOOS-12 with a more evenly distribution of scores across the scale when studying well performing cohorts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Impact of Obesity on the Forgotten Joint Score Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Obesity is a growing public health concern. This study aims to identify the association of body mass index (BMI) on postoperative Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 2130 patients at a single urban, academic, tertiary institution who underwent primary THA from 2016-2020 with available postoperative FJS-12 scores. Patients were stratified into two groups based on their BMI (kg/m²):<30 (nonobese) and ≥30 (obese). FJS-12 scores were collected postoperatively at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Demographic differences were assessed with chi-square and independent sample t-tests. Mean scores between the groups were compared using multilinear regression analysis, controlling for demographic differences.

RESULTS

Of the 2130 patients included, 1378 were nonobese, and 752 were obese. Although obese patients reported lower FJS-12 scores all time periods, there were no statistical differences between the two groups at 3 months (53.61 vs 49.62;P = .689), 1 year (68.11 vs 62.45; P = .349), and 2 years (73.60 vs 65.58; P = .102). A subanalysis comparing patients who were of normal BMI (<25), overweight (25.0-29.9), and obese (≥30) followed a similar inverse trend in scores but showed no statistical differences at all postoperative time points (3m:P = .612,1y:P = .607,2y:P = .253). Mean improvement in FJS-12 scores from 3 months to 1 year (14.50 vs 12.83; P = .041), 1 year to 2 years (5.49 vs 3.13; P = .004), and from 3 months to 2 years (20.00 vs15.96; P < .001) were significantly greater for nonobese patients compared to obese patients.

CONCLUSION

While obesity trended toward lower FJS-12 scores, the differences in scores were not statistically significant compared to nonobese patients. BMI did not influence overall FJS-12 scores; however, obese patients achieved a slightly smaller statistical improvement during the first 2 years, though this may not be clinically significant.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study.

A Medial Congruent Polyethylene Offers Satisfactory Early Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Although a successful operation, almost 20% of patients are dissatisfied with total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to see if a medial congruent (MC) polyethylene would offer satisfactory early outcomes and patient satisfaction after TKA.

Methods

We reviewed prospectively collected data on 327 TKAs using multiple bearings within the same implant system. Ninety-six received an MC bearing, 70 received a cruciate-retaining (CR) bearing, and 161 received a posterior-stabilized (PS) bearing. We evaluated the visual analog scale pain scores and range of motion (ROM) at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year; Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-10) score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 3 months and 1 year; and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) at 1 year.

Results

All groups had similar KOOS and PROMIS-10 scores. MC knees had lower visual analog scale scores than PS knees at all time points (P < .05) and a higher ROM than PS at 2 weeks (98.6 vs 93.7, P = .002). MC knees had a significantly higher FJS-12 than CR knees (71.6 vs 58.7, P = .02). More MC knees were “very satisfied” than CR (92.6% vs 81.5%, P = .04). Fewer MC knees were “not at all satisfied” than CR (1.2% vs 9.2%, P = .04). There were similar satisfaction ratings with MC and PS.

Conclusions

An MC bearing provided similar or improved early pain, ROM, KOOS, PROMIS-10, FJS-12, and patient satisfaction as compared with standard bearings in TKA.

Joint Awareness after Patellofemoral Arthroplasty Evaluated with the Forgotten Joint Score: A Comparison Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to compare the forgotten joint score (FJS) in patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis who underwent patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) versus those who underwent total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to analyze the predictors of the FJS after PFA.

METHODS

From January 2014 to December 2017, a retrospective cohort study of 56 consecutive patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis underwent PFA and were included in the PFA group. The patients in the PFA group were matched in a 1:1 ratio based on age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and follow-up duration; 56 patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis underwent cruciate-retaining TKA (TKA group). The FJS, range of motion of the knee, and Knee Society Score were assessed at 1 and 3 years postoperatively. In addition, the associations between the potential influencing factors (age, sex, BMI, and preoperative Iwano score of the patellofemoral joint) and the FJS were analyzed using multiple linear regression in the PFA group.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the PFA and TKA groups regarding age (P = 0.316), sex (P = 0.832), BMI (P = 0.447), and follow-up duration (P = 0.625). Postoperatively, the range of motion of the knee and Knee Society Score was significantly higher in the PFA group than the TKA group at both follow-up points (P < 0.05). The PFA group had a significantly higher mean FJS than the TKA group at 1 year postoperatively (62.9 ± 12.3 vs 54.1 ± 14.2, P = 0.034) and 3 years postoperatively (63.3 ± 14.1 vs 55.6 ± 16.4, P = 0.042). In the PFA group, multiple linear regression analysis showed that older age was positively correlated with the FJS, while a higher BMI was negatively correlated with the FJS.

CONCLUSION

The patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis who underwent PFA were more likely to forget the artificial joint and, consequently, may experience a higher degree of satisfaction. In addition, we identified two preoperative patient-related factors (age and BMI) that may predict the FJS after PFA, which might help in chosing the most appropriate operation.

Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Medial Stabilized Versus Non-Medial Stabilized Prostheses in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of medial stabilized total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with non-medial stabilized TKAs.

METHODS

A systematic search of multiple databases was conducted in October 2019. A meta-analysis was conducted for the Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Society Functional Score (KFS), range of motion (ROM), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS).

RESULTS

A total of 857 articles yielded 21 studies eligible for inclusion with 13 studies used for quantitative analysis. The meta-analysis revealed that the medial stabilized group had a mean FJS that was 13.8 points higher than that of the non-medial stabilized TKA (mean difference [MD]: 13.83, P ≤ .0001, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.90-18.76, I² = 0%) which was less than the minimal clinically important difference of 14. The medial stabilized group also demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the postoperative ROM (MD = 2.52, P = .05, 95% CI: -0.03 to 5.07, I² = 85%) and OKS when compared with the non-medial stabilized group (MD = 1.25, P = .02, 95% CI: 0.17-2.33, I² = 27%), but these were not clinically significant. There was no statistically or clinically significant difference in the KSS, KFS, and WOMAC scores.

CONCLUSION

Medial stabilized knee prostheses demonstrated no clinically significant differences for the ROM, OKS, WOMAC, KSS, and KFS. The FJS demonstrated the greatest MD and warrants further investigation. Future research is required using patient-reported outcome measures with a lower ceiling effect such as the FJS.

The KOOS-12 shortform shows no ceiling effect, good responsiveness and construct validity compared to standard outcome measures after total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

To investigate the validity, responsiveness and ceiling effect of the recently introduced KOOS-12 and compare its performance to the KOOS, OKS, WOMAC and UCLA activity scales.

METHODS

Patients from an independent multicentre study examining a medially stabilized knee system prospectively completed the KOOS, OKS, WOMAC and UCLA preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. KOOS-12 scores were calculated from the full length KOOS data. Construct validity was assessed using Spearman's correlation analysis. The ceiling effect was evaluated by calculating the percentage of patients with a maximum score. If the percentage exceeded 15%, a ceiling effect was considered to be present. Responsiveness was evaluated by performing paired t tests on the changes in measures and calculation of Cohen's d.

RESULTS

A ceiling effect was present for the KOOS Pain, ADL and QoL subscales and the KOOS-JR at 1 year postoperatively. No ceiling effect was observed for the KOOS-12. Correlation of the KOOS-12 was low (0.3 < r < 0.5) with the UCLA, moderate (0.5 < r < 0.7) with the KOOS symptoms, sports and WOMAC stiffness subscales and high (r > 0.7) with all other scores and subscales. Effect size of the UCLA activity scale was moderate (Cohen's d 0.2-0.8) whereas effect sizes of all other outcome measures were large (d > 0.8).

CONCLUSION

The KOOS-12 does not exhibit a ceiling effect, has good convergent construct validity and is responsive to changes in pain, function, QoL and knee impact between preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic level III.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the quality of clinical practice, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important as certain questions could only be answered by the patient himself. PROMs help to get a better understanding what is meaningful to a patient and directly affects daily functioning. To move beyond traditional measures, we are interested in what matters to patients and developed this project. The aim of this article is to provide the protocol for our study collecting PROMs in daily medical practice from patients who undergo knee arthroplasty.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a single-site, observational, prospective cohort study. We will recruit patients scheduled for a knee arthroplasty in our medical office, situated in a private clinic. After signed informed consent, patients complete self-reported questionnaires before the surgery, after 4 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years and 5 years. We will use the following PROMs: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Forgotten Joint Score, EuroQol five dimensions and satisfaction. Additionally, the surgeon will complete the objective Knee Society Score. Administration of the questionnaires will be electronically or paper-based. We will assess differences between preoperative and postoperative data with paired t-test for continuous variables and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for categorical variables. To assess subgroup differences, we will use unpaired t-test for continuous variables and Mann-Whitney U test for categorical variables. To assess possible presence of bias, we will conduct sensitivity analyses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been reviewed and approved by the local ethics committee in Basel, Switzerland. Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients. We will disseminate the results of the study through peer-reviewed journals, national and international conference presentations and presentations to relevant stakeholders through appropriate channels.

Forgotten Joint Score in THA: Comparing the Direct Anterior Approach to Posterior Approach

BACKGROUND

The direct anterior approach (DAA) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has gained popularity because of potential decreased postoperative pain and quicker recovery after surgery in comparison to the posterior approach (PA). With a growing focus on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements after surgery, we sought to determine if one approach led to better PRO scores as determined by the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) questionnaire.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of primary THAs between September 2016 and September 2019 at a single academic hospital was conducted. Demographic and clinical data in addition to FJS-12 scores were collected. Two groups were created based on THA approach. Frequency rates, means, and standard deviations were used to describe baseline patient characteristics. Differences in demographic data were accounted for using linear regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 1469 cases were identified, with 830 using the DAA and 639 the PA. Significant demographic differences were observed between the 2 groups. However, when controlling for this, there were no differences in FJS-12 scores between approaches at 1 and 1.75 years (P = .232 and P = .486, respectively). At 12 weeks, DAA patients had higher satisfaction (59.21 vs 46.8; P = .006). When controlling for surgeon case volume, no differences in FJS-12 were observed at any of the time points (P = .536, P = .452, and P = .967, respectively) CONCLUSION: DAA THA patients trended toward better PRO scores than their PA counterparts. However, when controlling for surgeon case volume, no differences were observed, which suggests that surgeon case volume and experience have an important effect on patient satisfaction and FJS-12 scores.

Forgotten Joint Score for early outcome assessment after total knee arthroplasty: Is it really useful?

Background

Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) has become a popular tool for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but almost all studies had assessment performed 1 year after surgery. There is a need for a sensitive tool for earlier outcome assessment. The aim of this study was to investigate the usefulness of FJS within the first year after TKA.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study. Patients within the first year after primary TKA were recruited. FJS was translated into the local language with a cross-cultural adaptation and was validated by assessing the correlation with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index score (WOMAC). Ceiling and floor effects (highest or lowest 10% or 15%) of both scores were compared. Skewness of scores was assessed with a histogram.

Results

One hundred sixty-three subjects were recruited: 84 (51.5%) had evaluation at 3 months after the operation, 56 (34.4%) at 6 months, and 23 (14.1%) at 12 months. FJS had fewer patients at the highest 10% (10.7% vs. 16.1%, P = 0.046) or 15% (19.6% vs. 32.1%, P = 0.027) at 6 months and within the first year overall (6.7% vs. 13.5%, P <0.001; 14.1% vs. 22.7%, P <0.001). Also, it had more patients at the lowest 10% (16.7% vs. 0%, P <0.001) or 15% (21.4% vs. 0%, P <0.001) at 3 months, 6 months (10.7% vs. 0%, P <0.001), and overall (12.9% vs. 0%, P <0.001; 16.6% vs. 0%, P <0.001). The skewness was much less than WOMAC (0.09 vs. −0.56).

Conclusions

FJS has a low ceiling effect but a high floor effect in the first year after TKA. Such characteristics make it less useful for the general assessment of early patient report outcome after operation.

Influencing Factors for Joint Perception After Total Hip Arthroplasty: Asian Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Perceiving replaced joints as natural is one of the best scenario after total hip arthroplasty (THA). We investigated the distribution of and influencing factors for patient's joint perception after THA in Asian cohort, which is not well known.

METHODS

We mailed a questionnaire to Asian patients who had undergone THA in our institution between 2012 and 2016, and this study included 318 Asian patients. The questionnaire assessed patient's joint perception, Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12) physical, mental, and role component summaries, and satisfaction score. Leg length discrepancy and global femoral offset before and after THA were measured using radiographs. The patients were divided into 2 groups with patient's joint perception: natural and artificial perception groups. OHS, SF-12, satisfaction, leg length discrepancy, and global femoral offset were compared between natural and artificial perception groups, and which factors significantly influenced joint perception were determined.

RESULTS

Of the 318 patients, 165 patients (51.8%) perceived their replaced joint as a natural joint. OHS, SF-12 physical and role component summaries, and satisfaction score in natural perception group were significantly higher than those in artificial perception group, without significant difference in SF-12 mental component summary. Multivariate analysis showed that less of usual pain, easier to get in or out of a car, and osteoarthritis in the contralateral hip were positively associated with natural joint perception after THA.

CONCLUSION

This study indicated to surgeons that pain relief and improvement in getting in or out of a car after THA could lead to even better patient's joint perception.

Determining the Validity, Reliability, and Utility of the Forgotten Joint Score: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

With improving patient outcome after total hip and total knee arthroplasty, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have seen a parallel rise in average scores and ceiling effects. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a PROM that has been previously proposed to reduce this observed ceiling effect. However, the validity and reliability of the FJS has not been well analyzed.

METHODS

The US National Library of Medicine (PubMed/MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried using keywords pertinent to FJS, validity, reliability, measurement properties, and PROM. The methodological quality of measurement properties was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 13 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this analysis. Internal consistency was consistently high (Cronbach alpha >0.9). Test-retest reliability was good or excellent (interclass correlation coefficient ≥0.8) in all studies. As for construct validity, all the articles reported a positive rating. Floor and ceiling effects overall were low (<15%). Conflicting results were found for responsiveness and measurement error.

CONCLUSION

There is a strong evidence of good construct validity and test-retest reliability regarding the FJS, with moderate evidence of good internal consistency. Ceiling and floor effects were very low, showing a very promising discriminatory power between patients with a good outcome and patients with an excellent outcome. Therefore, especially in patients expected to achieve high levels of function after total joint replacement, we highly recommend the use of FJS for the long-term assessment of their treatment.

Editorial Commentary: The Forgotten Joint Score-Don't Compare Apples to Oranges

Patient outcomes have become focused on satisfaction with the end result. It is now appreciated that objective measurements are not the sole criterion for a successful surgical procedure. With the transition to evaluating patient-reported outcome measures, additional scoring techniques are being used to determine the best method for defining surgical success. The Forgotten Joint Score asks the simple question, "Are you aware of the joint that had surgery?" Essentially, does the patient have any sense that there has been surgery on the limb or joint? Although it has been validated as a reliable testing technique in specific surgical procedures, it has not been validated as a method of comparing 2 dissimilar surgical procedures. One must be selective and careful when using scoring methods. There are no data or validation to support the use of patient perception of the joint on surgical procedures that are divergent in their approach. Patient-reported outcomes such as the Forgotten Joint Score should not be used to compare procedures that are dissimilar in technique.

Postoperative outcomes of total knee arthroplasty compared to unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A matched comparison

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate early postoperative outcomes in patients following UKA (unicompartmental knee arthroplasty) compared to a matched cohort of TKA (total knee arthroplasty) patients.

METHODS

Patients who met radiographic criteria for a medial UKA who underwent either a TKA or UKA at a single institution were matched based on age, gender, and BMI.

RESULTS

One hundredy and fifty UKA in 138 patients and 150 TKA in 148 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. Mean age was 62.6 ± 9 years and 65.2 ± 9 years in the UKA and TKA groups respectively (p = .01). Patients who underwent UKA had significantly less pain at two and six weeks postoperatively compared to TKA patients with mean Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) scores of 3.7 ± 1.1 vs. 7.8 ± 1.2, p < .001 and 2.6 ± 1.3 vs. 4.6 ± 1.6, p < .001 respectively. Knee Society Scores (KSS) were higher in the UKA group at six weeks and two years postoperative (86.5 ± 2.8 vs. 81.4 ± 3.6, p < .001 and 89.5 ± 2.4 vs. 84.5 ± 3.3, p < .001 respectively). Return to work was faster in the UKA group (mean 20.6 ± 7.89 vs. 38.6 ± 6.23 days, p < .001). The UKA group also had higher mean Forgotten Joint Scores of 90.5 ± 3.6 vs. 79.5 ± 9.5 (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with primarily medial compartment OA who underwent UKA had less postoperative pain, earlier return to work, and higher KSS compared to a matched group who underwent TKA.

A Single Surgeon Series Comparing the Outcomes of a Cruciate Retaining and Medially Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Kinematic Alignment Principles

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs are developed to optimize kinematics and improve patient satisfaction. The cruciate retaining (CR) and medially stabilized (MS) TKA designs have reported good mid-term follow-up outcomes. However, reasons for consistently high rates of patient dissatisfaction following a TKA remain poorly understood. To further investigate this, we compared the short-term functional outcomes and quality of life, using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and range of motion (ROM), between a CR and MS TKA.

METHODS

A prospective comparison was made between 2 groups (44 CR-TKAs vs 46 MS-TKAs). The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), KOOS-12, KOOS-Short form, KOOS-Joint Replacement, Oxford Knee Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, UCLA Activity Scale, and EuroQuality of life - 5 Dimension were completed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and Visual Analogue Scale-Satisfaction were completed at 1 year postoperatively. ROM was collected preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent an MS-TKA scored significantly better than the CR-TKA on the FJS (MS = 79.87, CR = 63.8, P = .005), the KOOS-12 Quality of Life subscale (MS = 82.8, CR = 74.4, P = .43), and the KOOS Quality of Life subscale (MS = 82.8, CR = 74.6, P = .44). There was no difference between the groups in all assessed PROMs or ROM, preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent the MS-TKA scored significantly better on the FJS and the quality of life subscale of the KOOS and KOOS-12 than those who underwent a CR-TKA. All other assessed PROMs and ROM were comparable between the 2 groups and demonstrated that both implants facilitated symptom relief and improved daily function at 1 year postoperatively. These findings suggest that at short-term follow-up, the MS device is more likely to allow a patient to "forget" that a joint has been replaced and restore their quality of life. Long-term assessment of MS-TKA design outcomes in larger cohorts is recommended.

Perception of a Natural Joint After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Assessing patients' functional outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with traditional scoring systems is limited by their ceiling effects. Patient's Joint Perception (PJP) question of the reconstructed joint is also of significant interest. Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) was created as a more discriminating option. The actual score constituting a "forgotten joint" has not yet been defined. The primary objective of this study is to compare the PJP and the FJS in TKA patients to determine the FJS score that corresponds to the patient's perception of a natural joint.

METHODS

One hundred TKAs were assessed at a mean of 40.6 months of follow-up using the PJP question, FJS, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Correlation between the 3 scores and their ceiling effects were analyzed.

RESULTS

With PJP question, 39% of the patients perceived a natural joint (FJS: 92.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 89.4-96.4), 12% an artificial joint with no restriction (FJS: 79.5; 95% CI, 65.7-93.3), 36% an artificial joint with minor restrictions (FJS: 70.0; 95% CI, 63.2-76.9), and 13% had major restrictions (FJS: 47.3; 95% CI. 32.8-61.7). PJP has a high correlation with FJS and WOMAC (Spearman's rho, -0.705 and -0.680, respectively). FJS and WOMAC had a significant ceiling effect with both reaching the best possible score in >15%.

CONCLUSION

Patients perceiving their TKA as a natural knee based on PJP have a FJS ≥89. PJP has a good correlation with FJS and may be a shorter, simple, and acceptable alternative.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Italian language Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) as an outcome measure for total knee arthroplasty in an Italian population

Background

With ever-increasing numbers of patients undergoing elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and as TKA is performed in increasingly younger patients, patient demands and expectations have also increased. With improved patient outcomes, new PROMs with heightened discriminatory power in well-performing patients are needed. The present study aimed to translate and validate the Italian version of the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS-12) as a tool for evaluating pre-operative through longitudinal post-operative outcomes in an Italian population.

Methods

In this prospective study, patients with unilateral osteoarthritis, undergoing TKA surgery between May 2015 and December 2017 were recruited to participate in the study. The FJS-12 and WOMAC were collected pre-operatively and at six and 12 months post-operatively. According to the COSMIN checklist, reliability, internal consistency, validity, responsiveness, effect size, and ceiling effects and floor effects were evaluated.

Results

One hundred twenty patients completed the study, 66 of which participated in the evaluation of test-retest reliability. Good test-retest reliability was found (ICC = 0.90). The FJS-12 also showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.81). Construct validity with the WOMAC, as a measure of the Pearson correlation coefficient, was moderate (r = 0.45 pre-operatively; r = 0.46 at 6 months and r = 0.42 at 12 months post-operatively). From six to 12 months, the change was slightly greater for the WOMAC than for the FJS-12 patients (effect size d = 0.94; d = 0.75, respectively). At 12-months follow-up, the ceiling effects reflecting the maximum score were 12% for the FJS-12 and 6% for the WOMAC; however, scores within 10% of the maximum score were comprised 30% of the FJS-12 scores and 59% for the WOMAC.

Conclusion

The Italian FJS-12 demonstrated strong measurement properties in terms of reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity in TKA patients. Furthermore, a more detailed look at ceiling effects shows a superior discriminatory capacity when compared to the WOMAC at 12-months follow-up, particularly in better-performing patients.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov NCT03805490. Registered 18 January 2019 (retrospectively registered).

Can We Help Patients Forget Their Joint? Determining a Threshold for Successful Outcome for the Forgotten Joint Score

BACKGROUND

Clinically important thresholds improve interpretability of patient-reported outcomes. A threshold for a successful outcome does not exist for the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS). The purpose of this study is to determine a threshold score for the FJS, 1 and 2 years after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 247 primary THA recipients between December 2012 and April 2017 was performed. A binary "successful treatment" was defined as achieving a composite criterion of pain, function, and satisfaction. Receiver operator characteristic analysis determined thresholds for successful outcome at 1 and 2 years postoperatively, subanalyzed by demographics. Results were validated by a 75th centile comparison. The ceiling effect of FJS was also assessed.

RESULTS

The average FJS was 70.06 ± 29.39 and 75.05 ± 28.73 at 1 and 2 years, respectively (P < .001). The proportion of patients meeting the composite criteria for success was 66.8% at 1 year and 76.5% at 2 years (P = .017). The receiver operator characteristic analysis for FJS at 1 and 2 years yielded excellent accuracy as defined by area under the curve (0.91 and 0.92, respectively). The threshold values were 73.96 and 69.79 at the respective time points. A mild ceiling effect was found with 16% and 23% of cases achieving a score of 100 at 1 and 2 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The FJS has excellent accuracy in demonstrating successful outcome following THA. The FJS threshold for success at 1 and 2 years postoperatively is 73.96 and 69.79, respectively. The higher rates of success at 2 years, along with a rise in the mean FJS, may indicate continued clinical improvement up to 2 years after THA.

Body-Self Unity With a New Hip or Knee: Understanding Total Joint Replacement Within an Embodiment Framework

Medical research increasingly makes use of embodiment concepts to understand how illness disrupts unity of body and self. However, few have applied embodiment concepts in total joint replacement (TJR), an effective treatment for end‐stage arthritis. In considering why a troubling proportion of TJR recipients have continued pain and functional limitation, we ask: what role might be played by the embodied experience of living with an implant? Relevant theoretical models and prior research on embodiment in musculoskeletal health and transplantation are reviewed. Our findings suggest a research agenda with implications for addressing suboptimal outcomes in TJR.

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 in Swedish patients undergoing knee arthroplasty: a validation study with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) as comparator

Background and purpose - Having patients self-evaluate the outcome is an important part of the follow-up after knee arthroplasty. The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) introduced joint awareness as a new approach, suggested to be sensitive enough to differentiate well-functioning patients. This study evaluated the Swedish translation of the FJS-12 and investigated the validity, reliability, and interpretability in patients undergoing knee arthroplastyPatients and methods - We included 109 consecutive patients 1 year after primary knee arthroplasty to assess construct validity (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha [CA]), floor and ceiling effects, and score distribution. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was the comparator instrument for the analyses. Further, 31 patients preoperatively and 22 patients postoperatively were included to assess test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]).Results - Construct validity was moderate to excellent (r = 0.62-0.84). The FJS-12 showed a high degree of internal consistency (CA = 0.96). The ICC was good preoperatively (0.76) and postoperatively (0.87). Ceiling effects were 2.8% in the FJS-12 and ranging between 0.9% and 10% in the KOOS.Interpretation - The Swedish translation of the FJS-12 showed good validity and reliability and can be used to assess outcome after knee arthroplasty. Moreover, the FJS-12 shows promising results in its ability to differentiate well-functioning patients. Future studies on unidimensionality, scale validity, interpretability, and responsiveness are needed for a more explicit analysis of the psychometric properties.

No difference in joint awareness after TKA: a matched-pair analysis of a classic implant and its evolutional design

PURPOSE

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs continuously evolve with the aim of improving patient outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcome (PRO) results of a new TKA implant to its predecessor. The hypothesis of this study was that joint awareness and range of motion (ROM) of the newer design would be better than the classic design.

METHODS

One hundred patients undergoing TKA using the newer design (Attune^®) were matched by age and gender to 200 patients with the classic design (LCS^®). All patients underwent computer-navigated (Vector Vision, Brain-Lab, Germany) primary TKA by the same surgeon using the same technique. Data (FJS-12, WOMAC and ROM) were collected preoperatively and at 12 months follow-up at our implant registry.

RESULTS

Compared to preoperative scores, FJS-12, WOMAC and ROM improved significantly at 12 months follow-up. In the Attune group, mean FJS-12 and WOMAC at follow-up were 67.6 (SD 27.8) and 14.8 (SD 14.9) respectively, compared to 70.8 (SD 33.8) and 15 (SD 17.9) in the LCS group. Mean postoperative ROM was similar in both groups (Attune 120°, range 90°-140°, SD 10.4 and LCS 120°, range 85°-140°, SD 10.3).

CONCLUSION

The newer TKA and the predecessor design achieved comparable joint awareness, WOMAC scores and ROM at 1-year follow-up. The benefits expected of the newer design could not be observed in early clinical and PROs. The clinical relevance of this study is that it questions the importance of implant design as the single most important factor for patient outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

High relative reliability and responsiveness of the forgotten joint score-12 in patients with femoroacetabular impingement undergoing hip arthroscopic treatment. A prospective survey-based study

The forgotten joint score-12 (FJS-12) may be an advantageous questionnaire in young patients with high hip function and a low level of pain. We investigated the reliability and the responsiveness of the FJS-12 in patients with femoroacetabular impingement undergoing hip arthroscopic treatment. Fifty patients were included in the reliability study and 34 patients were included in the responsiveness study. Test-retest reliability was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Responsiveness was assessed from testing correlations between the FJS-12 and the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) of the change score, effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). Floor and ceiling effect were defined as present if the number of patients obtaining the maximum (100) and minimum score (0) exceeded 15%. The relative reliability was high (ICC = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.8-0.9) and the absolute reliability was low (SEM = 11, MDC_individual = 32, MDC_group = 4.5). The responsiveness was high, and the change score was highly correlated with the subscale 'pain' from the HAGOS and moderately correlated with the subscale 'ADL'. Furthermore, the FJS-12 exceeded or equalled the HAGOS subscales in ES and SRM. Below 15% of the patients scored the maximum or minimum score. The FJS-12 has high reliability, high responsiveness to change and shows no floor or ceiling effect.

Normative Values for the Forgotten Joint Score-12 for the US General Population

BACKGROUND

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is a patient-reported outcome questionnaire of joint awareness in patients with hip and knee pathologies. To improve interpretability of values derived from this measure, we collected normative values for the US general population.

METHODS

A sample of 2000 participants, representative of US general population, was sought via an online panel. Quota sampling was used to obtain age-specific and sex-specific groups of 200 participants each. The FJS-12 is a 12-item questionnaire assessing the ability to forget the hip or knee joint during activities of daily living. To match US national census data from 2010, raking was used for determining data weights.

RESULTS

Normative data for the FJS-12 could be established based on a data set from 2017 respondents (50.1% men; mean age, 54.0 years; 66.3% white/Caucasian). Median FJS-12 scores in the total sample were 75.0 points for knees and 87.5 points for hips. In the age-specific and sex-specific groups, the lowest median score for knees was 54.2 points (men aged 18-39 years) and the highest median was 97.0 (men aged above 70 years). Similarly, median scores for hips were lowest in men aged 18-39 years (60.9 points) and highest in men aged above 70 years (100 points).

CONCLUSION

Normative values have been established for the FJS-12 for hips and knees in US general population. Age-specific and sex-specific differences require relying on normative values from the respective groups when interpreting FJS-12 data.

Joint Perception After Total Hip Arthroplasty and the Forgotten Joint

BACKGROUND

Assessing patients' functional outcomes following total hip arthroplasty with traditional scoring systems is limited by their ceiling effects. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) has been suggested as a more discriminating option. The actual score in the FJS which constitutes a "forgotten joint," however, has not been defined. The emerging concept of joint perception led to the development of the Patient's Joint Perception question (PJP) to assess the patient's opinion of their prosthetic joint.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-seven total hip arthroplasties were assessed at a mean of 68 months of follow-up (range 57-79). Outcomes included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), FJS, and PJP. Correlation of the scores as well as the ceiling effects were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean FJS was 88.5 (range 27.1-100). PJP was correlated with the FJS and WOMAC (Spearman's rho -0.510 and 0.465, respectively). Fifty-two percent of the patients felt their hip as a natural joint (FJS: 95% confidence interval [CI] 93.3-96.0), 24.1% as an artificial joint with no restriction (FJS: 95% CI 83.1-90.5), and 23.3% as an artificial joint with minor restrictions (FJS: 95% CI 73.8-82.2). Only 0.8% had major restrictions and none reported a non-functional joint. The ceiling effect was high with both the WOMAC and FJS, with 27.2% and 31.9%. In addition, 28.6% of the patients had a WOMAC >10 and 23.4% an FJS <90 while reporting having a natural hip. Furthermore, 21.5% with a perfect WOMAC or 21.9% with a perfect FJS reported having an artificial joint with or without limitation.

CONCLUSION

A forgotten hip perception corresponds to an FJS >93. In 20%-30% of the cases, the WOMAC and FJS failed to identify the forgotten joint, or reached the maximum score when the patients did not feel their hip was natural. The PJP is a simple and reliable tool that enables identification of patients who feel replaced hip is natural.

Patient-reported outcome metrics following total knee arthroplasty are influenced differently by patients' body mass index

PURPOSE

This study investigated the impact of body mass index (BMI) on improvement in patient outcomes (pain, function, joint awareness, general health and satisfaction) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Data were obtained for primary TKAs performed at a single centre over a 12-month period. Data were collected pre-operatively and 12-month postoperatively with the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) measuring pain and function, the EQ-5D-3L measuring general health status, the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) measuring joint awareness and a single question on treatment satisfaction. Change in scores following surgery was compared across the BMI categories identified by the World Health Organization (< 25.0, 25.0-29.9, 30.0-34.9, 35.0-39.9 and ≥ 40.0). Differences in postoperative improvement between the BMI groups were analysed with an overall Kruskal-Wallis test, with post hoc pairwise comparisons between BMI groups with Mann-Whitney tests.

RESULTS

Of 402 patients [mean age 70.7 (SD 9.2); 55.2% women] 15.7% were normal weight (BMI < 25.0), 33.1% were overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9), 28.2% had class I obesity (BMI 30.0-34.9), 16.2% had class II obesity (BMI 35.0-39.9), and 7.0% had class III obesity (BMI ≥ 40.0). Postoperative change in OKS (n.s.) and EQ-5D-3L (n.s.) was not associated with BMI. Higher BMI group was associated with less improvement in FJS-12 scores (p = 0.010), reflecting a greater awareness of the operated joint during activity in the most obese patients. Treatment satisfaction was associated with BMI category (p = 0.029), with obese patients reporting less satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

In TKA patients, outcome parameters are influenced differently by BMI. Our study showed a negative impact of BMI on postoperative improvement in joint awareness and satisfaction scores, but there was no influence on pain, function or general health scores. This information may be useful in terms of setting expectations expectation in obese patients planning to undergo TKA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1.

When Does the Knee Feel Normal Again: A Cross-Sectional Study Assessing the Forgotten Joint Score in Patients After Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The forgotten joint score (FJS) is a recent scoring system that assesses how natural the prosthesis feels after total joint arthroplasty. Although the FJS has been extensively applied in populations with total hip prosthetics, less is known about the patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study is to investigate the temporal relationship between TKA and the FJS.

METHODS

We evaluated 566 patients after TKA using the FJS questionnaire. Scores were calculated at the follow-up intervals of 1 (n = 79), 6 (n = 78), 12 (n = 81), 24 (n = 100), 36 (n = 76), 48 (n = 75), and 60 (n = 77) months. The scores ranged from 0-100, with a higher score indicating a more natural or "forgotten" joint.

RESULTS

Postoperative FJS averages were 39.3 ± 27.4 at 1 month, 59.4 ± 28.3 at 6 months, 72.5 ± 24.2 at 1 year, 76.4 ± 23.4 at 2 years, 75.1 ± 24.2 at 3 years, 68.6 ± 28.7 at 4 years, and 64.4 ± 29.0 at 5 years. The average score at 1 month was significantly lower than the average scores at all other intervals. The average score at 6 months was significantly lower than the average scores at 12, 24, and 36 months. The average score at 60 months was significantly lower than the average score at 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of this study, patients can expect marked improvement in the natural feel of the prosthesis during the first year after TKA, slight continued improvement at 2 and 3 years, and a decline after 4 years.

Validating the forgotten joint score-12 in patients after ACL reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The forgotten joint score-12 (FJS-12), used to measure postoperative joint awareness, has been extensively validated to assess outcomes after arthroplasty, however the new score has never been validated in evaluating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The purpose of our study was to validate the FJS-12 versus the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) for patients who have undergone ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

All patients who had undergone ACL reconstruction with the same arthroscopic surgical technique at our institution between 2011 and 2014 (medium-term follow-up group (M-FU)) or between 2000 and 2005 (long-term follow-up group (L-FU)) were considered for inclusion in the study. To analyze unidimensionality of the FJS-12, we calculated Cronbach's alpha, item-total correlations and conducted an exploratory principal component factor analysis. To assess convergent validity, we calculated Spearman correlation coefficients for the FJS-12 and its comparable scales.

RESULTS

We analyzed 58 patients of the M-FU (mean follow-up 31.5 (SD13.4) months, range 12-54), and 58 patients of the L-FU (mean follow-up 139 (SD15.2) months, range 120-179). The FJS-12 showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.95). Ceiling effects were considerably lower for the FJS-12 (M-FU 12.1%, L-FU 15.5%) compared with the KOOS subscales (M-FU 5.2-37.9%; L-FU 13.8-55.2%) and WOMAC subscales (M-FU 37.9-62.1%; L-FU 44.8-60.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The FJS-12 is a valid measurement tool to evaluate outcomes of ACL reconstruction. This study extends the possibilities of measuring joint awareness as a patient-reported outcome parameter from joint arthroplasty to ACL reconstruction.

Joint awareness after ACL reconstruction: patient-reported outcomes measured with the Forgotten Joint Score-12

PURPOSE

To measure joint awareness in patients who have undergone anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and to investigate medium- and long-term results of the procedure.

METHODS

All patients who had undergone ACL reconstruction with the same arthroscopic surgical technique at our institution between 2011 and 2014 (medium-term follow-up group (Group I)) or between 2000 and 2005 (long-term follow-up group (Group II)) were considered for inclusion in the study. A group of healthy controls were recruited to obtain reference values for the FJS-12 (Forgotten Joint Score-12). Propensity score matching was applied to improve comparability of patients and healthy controls in terms of sex and age.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight patients of the Group I (mean follow-up 31.5 (SD13.4) months, range 12-54), 57 patients of the Group II (mean follow-up 139 (SD15.2) months, range 120-179), and the healthy control samples (100 individuals) were analysed. Significantly lower FJS-12 was found in both groups (Group I: 71.6 and Group II: 70.1), compared to the two matched control groups (88.1 and 90.0).

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of joint awareness was successfully applied to evaluate medium- and long-term results of ACL reconstruction. The clinical relevance of this study is that it extends the construct of joint awareness as a patient-reported outcome parameter to ACL reconstruction surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty: Which type of artificial joint do patients forget?

PURPOSE

During recent years, there has been an intensive growth of interest in the patient's perception of functional outcome. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a recently introduced score that measures joint awareness of patients who have undergone knee arthroplasty and is less limited by ceiling effects. The aim of this study was to compare the FJS between patients who undergo medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and patients who undergo total knee arthroplasty (TKA) 1 and 2 years post-operatively.

METHODS

This prospective study compares the FJS at a minimum of one (average 1.5 years, range 1.0-1.9) and a minimum of 2 years (average 2.5 years, range 2.0-3.6) post-operatively between patients who underwent medial UKA and TKA.

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirty patients were included. Sixty-five patients underwent medial UKA and 65 patients underwent TKA. At both follow-up points, the FJS was significantly higher in the UKA group (FJS 1 year 73.9 ± 22.8, FJS 2 year 74.3 ± 24.8) in contrast to the TKA group (FJS 1 year 59.3 ± 29.5 (p = 0.002), FJS 2 year 59.8 ± 31.5, (p = 0.004)). No significant improvement in the FJS was observed between 1- and 2-year follow-up of the two cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Patients who undergo UKA are more likely to forget their artificial joint in daily life and consequently may be more satisfied.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.