. 2014 Mar;96(2):89–94. doi: 10.1308/003588414X13824511649571

Table 2.

Articles reporting on patient satisfaction in orthopaedic enhanced recovery after surgery

Paper	Methodology	groups compared	Results	sample size
Barker, 2006 ¹¹	Comparative	Unicompartmental knee replacement: ERAS (n=21) vs standard care (n=20)	ERAS and standard care groups highly satisfied	41
Husted, 2008 ¹³	Comparative	THR (n=370) compared with TKR (n=342). ERAS only.	Positive correlation between reduced LOS and overall satisfaction. High satisfaction scores during all parts of hospital stay. No significant difference between TKR and THR.	712
Husted, 2011 ¹⁴	Comparative	Bilateral TKR (n=150) compared with unilateral TKR (n=271) matched for sex but not age. ERAS only.	Patient satisfaction uniformly high with no significant difference across unilateral and bilateral TKR patients	421
Larsen, 2012 ¹⁵	Comparative	TKR and UKR compared with normative population data. ERAS only.	Sex, age, implant type or preoperative QoL did not significantly predict patient satisfaction at 12 months.	157
Husted, 2010 ¹⁶	National survey	THR and TKR: outcomes data compared between hospitals with shorter and longer LOS	Significantly higher patient satisfaction with doctors’ communication in hospitals with shorter LOS	563
Husted, 2011 ¹⁷	Case series	Revision knee replacement. ERAS only.	High patient satisfaction regarding LOS and entire stay	29

ERAS = enhanced recovery after surgery; THR = total hip replacement; TKR = total knee replacement; LOS = length of stay; UKR = unicompartmental knee replacement; QoL = quality of life