For RA patients undergoing TKR, the gain in function at 6 months following surgery is less than that experienced by OA patients; for THR, however, gains are similar in OA and RA patients. Total joint replacement (TJR) is commonly used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and yet little information is available to quantify their functional gain following surgery and how it differs from what the osteoarthritis (OA) population experiences. Therefore, we examined 6-month functional outcomes of TJR in a population-based observational cohort of RA and OA patients who underwent total hip (THR) or knee (TKR) replacement.Summary Statement
Introduction
This data may help explain the variability in physical function after primary TKR as compared to primary THR. Total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) reliably relieve pain, restore function, and ensure mobility in patients with advanced joint arthritis; however these results are not uniform across all patient populations. We compared baseline demographic and symptom profiles in patients from a US national cohort undergoing primary TKR and THR.Summary Statement
Introduction
Total knee replacement (TKR) and total hip replacement (THR) reliably relieve pain, restore function, and ensure mobility in patients with advanced joint arthritis; however these results are not uniform across all patient populations. Moreover, it is well established that knee replacement patients have outcomes inferior to those undergoing hip replacement procedures with lower rates of dissatisfaction with post-operative function and pain relief. We compared baseline demographic and symptom profiles in patients from a US national cohort undergoing primary TKR and THR to determine whether differences in demographic make-up, pre-operative symptoms, or pre-existing co-morbidities might contribute to these differences observed post-operatively. A cohort of 2375 patients undergoing primary TKR and THR was identified from the FORCE national research consortium from all surgeries performed between July 1st 2011 and March 30th 2012. This set of patients was derived from 120 contributing surgeons in 23 US states. Gathered data included patient demographics, comorbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index), operative joint pain severity (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC)), physical function (SF-36; Physical Component Score (PCS)), emotional health (SF-36; Mental Component Score (MCS)), and musculoskeletal burden of illness (Hip and Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores; Oswestry Disability Index). Using descriptive statistics, we compared the baseline demographic characteristics and symptom profiles of patients undergoing TKR (n = 1362) and those undergoing THR (n = 1013).Introduction:
Methods:
There is an increasing trend within the US for utilization of total knee replacement for patients who are still of working-age. Numerous causes have been suggested, ranging from greater participation in demanding sporting activities to the epidemic of obesity. A universal concern is that increased arthritis burden will lead to increased disabilty and unsustainable health-care costs both now and in the future with increasing rates of revision surgery in the years ahead. This raises the critical question: Are younger patients receiving knee replacement prematurely? To address this issue, we compared the severity of operative knee pain and functional status in younger versus older TKR patients, drawing upon a national research registry. A cohort of 3314 primary TKR patients was identified from the FORCE national research consortium from all surgeries performed between July 1st 2011 and March 30th 2012. This set of patients was derived from 120 contributing surgeons in 23 US states. Data characterizing each patient undergoing surgery was derived from patients, surgeons and hospitals, and included the SF 36 Physical Component Score (PCS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire. WOMAC scores were also calculated from the KOOS data and transformed to a 0-to-100 scale with lower scores representing worse impairment. Using descriptive statistics, we compared the demographic and baseline characteristics of patients younger than 65 years of age (n = 1326) vs. those 65 years of age and older (n = 1988).Introduction:
Methods:
