Suppr超能文献

膝关节置换术后身体功能评估的临床研究中存在高度变异性:系统评价。

High variation among clinical studies in the assessment of physical function after knee replacement: a systematic review.

机构信息

Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences, and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.

Center of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Brandenburg a.d.H., Germany.

出版信息

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023 Sep;31(9):3854-3860. doi: 10.1007/s00167-023-07375-2. Epub 2023 Mar 13.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to summarise the current use of outcome measures for the assessment of physical function after knee joint replacement.

METHODS

A systematic approach following the PRISMA guidelines was used. Literature search was performed on MEDLINE database via PubMed and on Epistemonikos. Clinical trials (level of evidence I-II) on knee joint replacement reporting data on the 'physical function' domain published between January 2017 and June 2022 were included. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the evidence.

RESULTS

In the 181 articles that met the inclusion criteria, 49 different outcome measurements were used to evaluate clinical outcomes after knee joint replacement. The most frequently adopted patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the Knee Society Score (KSS) (78 studies; 43.1%), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Arthritis Index (62 studies; 34.3%), the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) (51 studies; 28.2%) and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (36 studies; 20%). The most frequently used performance-based outcome measures (PBOMs) were the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) test (30 studies; 16.6%) and the 6-min-walk test (6MWT) (21 studies; 11.6%). Among impairment-based outcome measures (IBOMs), range of motion (ROM) was the most used (74 studies; 40.9%).

CONCLUSION

There is considerable variation among clinical studies regarding the assessment of the physical function of patients after knee joint replacement. PROMs were found to be the most commonly adopted outcome measures; however, no single PROM was used in more than half of the papers analysed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, systematic review of level I-II studies.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在总结目前用于评估膝关节置换后身体功能的结果测量方法。

方法

采用 PRISMA 指南的系统方法。通过 PubMed 在 MEDLINE 数据库和 Epistemonikos 进行文献检索。纳入 2017 年 1 月至 2022 年 6 月期间报告膝关节置换“身体功能”领域数据的临床试验(证据水平 I-II)。使用描述性统计对证据进行总结。

结果

在符合纳入标准的 181 篇文章中,使用了 49 种不同的结果测量方法来评估膝关节置换后的临床结果。最常采用的患者报告结局测量(PROMs)是膝关节协会评分(KSS)(78 项研究;43.1%)、西部安大略省和麦克马斯特大学(WOMAC)关节炎指数(62 项研究;34.3%)、牛津膝关节评分(OKS)(51 项研究;28.2%)和膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分(KOOS)(36 项研究;20%)。最常使用的基于表现的结局测量(PBOMs)是计时起立行走测试(TUG)(30 项研究;16.6%)和 6 分钟步行测试(6MWT)(21 项研究;11.6%)。在基于损伤的结局测量(IBOMs)中,最常用的是关节活动度(ROM)(74 项研究;40.9%)。

结论

关于膝关节置换后患者身体功能的评估,临床研究之间存在相当大的差异。PROMs 被发现是最常采用的结局测量方法;然而,在分析的论文中,没有一种 PROM 被超过一半的论文采用。

证据水平

二级,I-II 级研究的系统评价。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0f3e/10435639/43560086c08f/167_2023_7375_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验