Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 1/2012

01-01-2012 | Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Development of a New Knee Society Scoring System

Authors: Philip C. Noble, PhD, Giles R. Scuderi, MD, Adam C. Brekke, BA, Alla Sikorskii, PhD, James B. Benjamin, MD, Jess H. Lonner, MD, Priya Chadha, MD, Daniel A. Daylamani, BS, W. Norman Scott, MD, Robert B. Bourne, MD, FRCSC

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The Knee Society Clinical Rating System was developed in 1989 and has been widely adopted. However, with the increased demand for TKA, there is a need for a new, validated scoring system to better characterize the expectations, satisfaction, and physical activities of the younger, more diverse population of TKA patients.

Questions/purposes

We developed and validated a new Knee Society Scoring System.

Methods

We developed the new knee scoring system in two stages. Initially, a comprehensive survey of activities was developed and administered to 101 unilateral TKA patients (53 women, 48 men). A prototype knee scoring instrument was developed from the responses to the survey and administered to 497 patients (204 men, 293 women; 243 postoperatively, 254 preoperatively) at 15 medical institutions within the United States and Canada. Objective and subjective data were analyzed using standard statistical and psychometric procedures and compared to the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score and SF-12 scores for validation. Based on this analysis, minor modifications led to the new Knee Society Scoring System.

Results

We found the new Knee Society Scoring System to be broadly applicable and to accurately characterize patient outcomes after TKA. Statistical analysis confirmed the internal consistency, construct and convergent validity, and reliability of the separate subscale measures.

Conclusions

The new Knee Society Scoring System is a validated instrument based on surgeon- and patient-generated data, adapted to the diverse lifestyles and activities of contemporary patients with TKA. This assessment tool allows surgeons to appreciate differences in the priorities of individual patients and the interplay among function, expectation, symptoms, and satisfaction after TKA.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Anderson JG, Wixson RL, Tsai D, Stulberg SD, Chang RW. Functional outcome and patient satisfaction in total knee patients over the age of 75. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:831–840.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Ayers DC, Franklin PD, Ploutz-Snyder R, Boisvert CB. Total knee replacement outcome and coexisting physical and emotional illness. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;440:157–161.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Bach CM, Nogler M, Steingruber IE, Ogon M, Wimmer C, Göbel G, Krismer M. Scoring systems in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;399:184–196.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Bayley KB, London MR, Grunkemeier GL, Lansky DJ. Measuring the success of treatment in patient terms. Med Care. 1995;33:AS226–AS35.PubMed
5.
Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B. 1995;57:289–300.
6.
Bourne RB. Measuring tools for functional outcomes in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:2634–2638.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, Davis AM, Mahomed NN, Charron KD. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:57–63.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Bourne RB, Maloney WJ, Wright JG. An AOA critical issue: the outcome of the outcomes movement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:633–640.PubMed
9.
Callahan CM, Drake BG, Heck DA, Dittus RS. Patient outcomes following tricompartmental total knee replacement: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 1994;271:1349–1357.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Chang CH, Reeve BB. Item response theory and its applications to patient-reported outcomes measurement. Eval Health Prof. 2005;28:264–282.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Chesworth BM, Mahomed NN, Bourne RB, Davis AM. Willingness to go through surgery again validated WOMAC clinically important difference from THR/TKR surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:907–918.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrica. 1951;16:297–334.CrossRef
13.
14.
Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:63–69.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty: results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:339–344.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Franklin PD, Li W, Ayers DC. The Chitranjan Ranawat Award. Functional outcome after total knee replacement varies with patient attributes. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:2597–2604.
17.
Gandhi R, Davey JR, Mahomed NN. Predicting patient dissatisfaction following joint replacement surgery. J Rheumatol. 2008;35:2415–2418.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P, Paul J, Dittus R, Croxford R, Katz B, Bombardier C, Heck D, Freund D. Health-related quality of life after knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:163–173.PubMed
19.
Hays RD, Morales LS, Reise SP. Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Med Care. 2000;38:II28–II42.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Healy WL, Sharma S, Schwartz B, Iorio R. Athletic activity after total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:2245–2252.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Heck DA, Robinson RL, Partridge CM, Lubitz RM, Freund DA. Patient outcomes after knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;356:93–110.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Impellizzeri FM, Mannion AF, Leunig M, Bizzini M, Naal FD. Comparison of the reliability, responsiveness, and construct validity of 4 different questionnaires for evaluating outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:861–869.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;248:13–14.PubMed
24.
Insall JN, Ranawat CS, Aglietti P, Shine J. A comparison of four models of total knee-replacement prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58:754–765.PubMed
25.
Janse AJ, Gemke RJBJ, Uiterwaal CSPM, van der Tweel I, Kimpen JL, Sinnema G. Quality of life: patients and doctors don’t always agree: a meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:653–661.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Kline P, Auld F, Cooper C. Five new personality scales: their location in the factor space of personality measures. J Clin Psychol. 1987;43:328–336.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Kline P, Cooper C. A factorial analysis of the authoritarian personality. Br J Psychol. 1984;75:171–176.CrossRef
28.
Konig A, Scheidler M, Rader C, Eulert J. The need for a dual rating system in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;345:161–167.PubMed
29.
Kreibich DN, Vaz M, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Kim P, Hardie R, Kramer J, Kirkley A. What is the best way of assessing outcome after total knee replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;331:221–225.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Kroenke K. Studying symptoms: sampling and measurement issues. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:844–853.PubMed
31.
Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:780–785.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Zhao K, Kelly M, Bozic KJ. Future young patient demand for primary and revision joint replacement: national projections from 2010 to 2030. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2606–2612.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Lingard EA, Katz JN, Wright RJ, Wright EA, Sledge CB. Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1856–1864.PubMed
34.
Mahomed NN, Liang MH, Cook EF, Daltroy LH, Fortin PR, Fossel AH, Katz JN. The importance of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty. J Rheumatol. 2002;29:1273–1279.PubMed
35.
Mahomed NN, Sledge CB, Daltroy LH, Fossel AH, Katz JN. Self-administered satisfaction scale for joint replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:9.
36.
Mancuso CA, Graziano S, Briskie LM, Peterson MG, Pellicci PM, Salvati EA, Sculco TP. Randomized trials to modify patients’ preoperative expectations of hip and knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:424–431.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Mancuso CA, Sculco TP, Wickiewicz TL, Jones EC, Robbins L, Warren RF, Williams-Russo P. Patients’ expectations of knee surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1005–1012.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Mäntyselkä P, Kumpusalo E, Ahonen R, Takala J. Patients’ versus general practitioners’ assessments of pain intensity in primary care patients with non-cancer pain. Br J Gen Pract. 2001;51:995–997.PubMed
39.
Mont MA, Marker DR, Seyler TM, Jones LC, Kolisek FR, Hungerford DS. High-impact sports after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:80–84.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Nilsdotter AK, Toksvig-Larsen S, Roos EM. Knee arthroplasty: are patients’ expectations fulfilled? A prospective study of pain and function in 102 patients with 5-year follow-up. Acta Orthop. 2009;80:55–61.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Noble PC, Conditt MA, Cook KF, Mathis KB. The John Insall Award. Patient expectations affect satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;452:35–43.
42.
Noble PC, Gordon MJ, Weiss JM, Reddix RN, Conditt MA, Mathis KB. Does total knee replacement restore normal knee function? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;431:157–165.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Orlando M, Thissen D. Likelihood-based item-fit indices for dichotomous item response theory models. Appl Psychol Meas. 2002;24:50–64.CrossRef
44.
Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner J. Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks. Med Care. 2007;45:S22–S31.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Robertsson O, Dunbar MJ. Patient satisfaction compared with general health and disease-specific questionnaires in knee arthroplasty patients. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:476–482.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28:88–96.PubMed
47.
Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)— validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:17.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Samejima F. Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. New York, NY: Springer; 1997. 49.
49.
Schmalzried TP, Szuszczewicz ES, Northfield MR, Akizuki KH, Frankel RE, Belcher G, Amstutz HC. Quantitative assessment of walking activity after total hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:54–59.PubMedCrossRef
50.
51.
Swanson EA, Schmalzried TP, Dorey FJ. Activity recommendations after total hip and knee arthroplasty: a survey of the American Association for Hip and Knee Surgeons. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:120–126.PubMedCrossRef
52.
53.
54.
Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220–233.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Weiss JM, Noble PC, Conditt MA, Kohl HW, Roberts S, Cook KF, Gordon MJ, Mathis KB. What functional activities are important to patients with knee replacements? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:172–188.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Wright JG. Evaluating the outcome of treatment: shouldn’t we be asking patients if they are better? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:549–553.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Wright JG, Young NL. The patient-specific index: asking patients what they want. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:974–983.PubMed
58.
Wylde V, Learmonth I, Potter A, Bettinson K, Lingard E. Patient-reported outcomes after fixed- versus mobile-bearing total knee replacement: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial using the Kinemax total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1172–1179.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Development of a New Knee Society Scoring System
Authors
Philip C. Noble, PhD
Giles R. Scuderi, MD
Adam C. Brekke, BA
Alla Sikorskii, PhD
James B. Benjamin, MD
Jess H. Lonner, MD
Priya Chadha, MD
Daniel A. Daylamani, BS
W. Norman Scott, MD
Robert B. Bourne, MD, FRCSC
Publication date
01-01-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-011-2152-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 1/2012 Go to the issue

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Perioperative Closure-related Complication Rates and Cost Analysis of Barbed Suture for Closure in TKA

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

The John Insall Award: No Functional Advantage of a Mobile Bearing Posterior Stabilized TKA

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Can Surgeons Predict What Makes a Good TKA?: Intraoperative Surgeon Impression of TKA Quality Does Not Correlate With Knee Society Scores

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Is There a Preferred Articulating Spacer Technique for Infected Knee Arthroplasty?: A Preliminary Study

Clinical Research

Incidence of Patients with Lower Extremity Injuries Presenting to US Emergency Departments by Anatomic Region, Disease Category, and Age

Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society

Patient-related Risk Factors for Postoperative Mortality and Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Medicare Patients Undergoing TKA