Service of SURF
© 2025 SURF
BackgroundPatients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) often experience strength deficits both pre- and post-operatively. As these deficits may have a direct impact on functional recovery, strength assessment should be performed in this patient population. For these assessments, reliable measurements should be used. This study aimed to determine the inter- and intrarater reliability of hand-held dynamometry (HHD) in measuring isometric knee strength in patients awaiting TKA.MethodsTo determine interrater reliability, 32 patients (81.3% female) were assessed by two examiners. Patients were assessed consecutively by both examiners on the same individual test dates. To determine intrarater reliability, a subgroup (n = 13) was again assessed by the examiners within four weeks of the initial testing procedure. Maximal isometric knee flexor and extensor strength were tested using a modified Citec hand-held dynamometer. Both the affected and unaffected knee were tested. Reliability was assessed using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC). In addition, the Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) and the Smallest Detectable Difference (SDD) were used to determine reliability.ResultsIn both the affected and unaffected knee, the inter- and intrarater reliability were good for knee flexors (ICC range 0.76-0.94) and excellent for knee extensors (ICC range 0.92-0.97). However, measurement error was high, displaying SDD ranges between 21.7% and 36.2% for interrater reliability and between 19.0% and 57.5% for intrarater reliability. Overall, measurement error was higher for the knee flexors than for the knee extensors.ConclusionsModified HHD appears to be a reliable strength measure, producing good to excellent ICC values for both inter- and intrarater reliability in a group of TKA patients. High SEM and SDD values, however, indicate high measurement error for individual measures. This study demonstrates that a modified HHD is appropriate to evaluate knee strength changes in TKA patient groups. However, it also demonstrates that modified HHD is not suitable to measure individual strength changes. The use of modified HHD is, therefore, not advised for use in a clinical setting.
MULTIFILE
Introduction: Patient information holds an important role in knee arthroplasty surgery regarding patients’ expectations and outcomes after surgery. The purpose of the present study was to explore the experiences and opinions of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty (KA) surgery on an information brochure provided preoperatively. Methods: A qualitative case study of 8 patients using individual semi-structured interviews was conducted to explore patients’ opinions on an information brochure in KA surgery. Results: Patients rated the brochure as good and recommended its use. Unsatisfactory information regarding wound healing, pain expectations, postoperative exercises and use of walking aids was reported. Patients stated that the table of contents was insufficient and the size of the brochure (A4-format) too large. Patients reported to have no need for additional digital sources (e.g. applications, websites). Conclusion: These opinions support the use of an information brochure. The reported opinions were used to improve the brochure. Future research should focus on the improvement of information sources by involving patients (and other users) in the development process in which the information is tailored towards patient needs.
Background: Postoperative rehabilitation after primary total hip arthroplasty (p-THA) differs between the Netherlands and Germany. Aim is to compare clinical effectiveness and to get a first impression of cost effectiveness of Dutch versus German usual care after p-THA. Methods: A transnational prospective controlled observational trial. Clinical effectiveness was assessed with self-reported questionnaires and functional tests. Measurements were taken preoperatively and 4 weeks, 12 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. For cost effectiveness, long-term economic aspects were assessed from a societal perspective. Results: 124 working-age patients finished the measurements. German usual care leads to a significantly larger proportion (65.6% versus 47.5%) of satisfied patients 12 weeks postoperatively and significantly better self-reported function and Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST) results. German usual care is generally 45% more expensive than Dutch usual care, and 20% more expensive for working-age patients. A scenario analysis assumed that German patients work the same number of hours as the Dutch, and that productivity costs are the same. This analysis revealed German care is still more expensive but the difference decreased to 8%. Conclusions: German rehabilitation is clinically advantageous yet more expensive, although comparisons are less straightforward as the socioeconomic context differs between the two countries. Trial registration: The study is registered in the German Registry of Clinical Trials (DRKS00011345, 18/11/2016).