Table 2.
Main characteristics of the observational studies.
| Study number | Follow-up | Scales | Main finding |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pre, 6 m, 24 m | SF-36, Oxford | There were improvements in the SF-36 and Oxford scores, especially regarding physical aspects and pain. |
| 2 | Pre, 2 y | SF-36 | TKA and THA significantly increased elderly patients’ QOL. |
| 3 | Pre, 6 w, 3 m, 6 m, 12 m | WOMAC, KSS, VAS | Six weeks after surgery, despite improvement in pain and relief of depressive states, function remained unsatisfactory. |
| 4 | Pre, 1 y | Oxford, SF-12 | Achievement of expectations was highly correlated with degree of satisfaction. |
| 5 | Oxford, EQ-5D | Increases in health indicators after TKA could be achieved through reduction of postoperative complications. | |
| 6 | Pre, 6 m | Oxford, EQ-5D | The increases in Oxford and EQ-5D scores were significantly greater in TKR than in UKR |
| 7 | Pre, 1 y | Oxford, SF-36 | There was a significant improvement in dynamic balance one year after surgery. |
| 8 | Pre, 6 m, 18 m | SF-36, EuroQol | There were significant improvements in QOL among patients undergoing TKA, both 6 and 18 months after surgery |
| 10 | Pre | WOMAC, SF-36 | Preoperative waiting time had a significantly negative impact on pain, function and QOL. |
| 11 | 1–3 d, 6 w | KOOS, SF-36 | Sex, age, axis, presence of other implants and preoperative contractures did not significantly QOL after surgery. |
| 12 | Pre, 12 m | WOMAC, 15D, Omeract, OARSI | The findings highlighted the multifactorial nature of the state of health in TKA cases. |
| 13 | Pre, 4 s | Lysholm and Gilquist, SF-36 | The positive effects from surgery could be seen as early as 4 weeks after the operation. |
| 14 | Pre, 2 m, 6 m, 12 m | KSS, SF-36, DynaPort ADL monitor, step activity monitor | The level of activity after treatment seems to be more influenced by physical activity behavior before the operation than by the treatment itself. |
| 15 | Pre, 6 m | WOMAC, SF-36 | Long preoperative waits had a negative impact on QOL and contralateral pain. |
| OAKHQOL, Quality of Care Scale | Patients who were satisfied with the medical information received had high postoperative QOL scores. | ||
| 16 | Pre | AQoL, WOMAC, Kessler PDS | More than half of the participants waiting for joint replacement experienced deterioration of QOL during the waiting period. |
| 17 | Pre, 3 m, 12 m | WOMAC, SF-12, EQ-5D | The patients’ expectations were achieved and there were large QOL gains. |
| 18 | Pre, 6 s, 3 m, 6 m | SF-36, KSCRS | A significant improvement in QOL was achieved among female patients, six weeks after the operation. |
| 19 | Pre, 7 y | WOMAC, SF-36 | Obesity and post-discharge complications were associated with worse scores in all dimensions of WOMAC. |
| 20 | 15 y | WOMAC, SF-36 | No significant differences were found between revised and non-revised cases. |
| 21 | 3 m, 6 m, 9 m | VAS, WOMAC, SF-36 | There were significant deteriorations in pain and physical function on the WOMAC scale among patients who were on the waiting list. |
| 22 | SF-36 | Body pain and physical function improved after arthroplasty. Social support was correlated with improvement of pain and physical function. | |
| 23 | Pre, 2 y | WOMAC, Oxford-12, SF-12, reported satisfaction | In follow-ups on TKA revision, the patients continued to have worse results, in comparison with primary TKA. |
| 24 | Pre, 6 m, 12 m, 24 m. | Nottingham Health, 15D | Greater gains were observed regarding pain, sleep and mobility. On average, in most QOL dimensions, the patients achieved QOL similar to that of the general population. |
| 25 | Pre, 36 m | WOMAC | There were significant differences from before to after the operation regarding pain, stiffness and functional scores. |
| 26 | Pre, 6 m, 7 y | WOMAC, SF-36 | Six months after surgery, an improvement was observed through both SF-36 and WOMAC. |
| 27 | WOMAC, SF-36 | Patients who had significant functional limitations, severe pain and low mental health scores were more likely to have worse postoperative results. | |
| 28 | Pre, 6 m, 1 y | Management of patients’ expectations and mental health might reduce dissatisfaction. |
Pre, preoperative period; d, days; w, weeks; m, months; y, years.
SF-36, Short Form Health Survey 36/12; WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities; Oxford, Oxford Knee Score; EQ-5D, European Quality of Life Instrument; KSS, Knee Society Score; KOOS, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome; Omeract-OARSI, Rheumatology-Osteoarthritis Research Society International; OAKHQOL, Osteo Arthritis Knee and Hip Quality Of Life; AQoL, Assessment of Quality of Life; Kessler PDS, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale; KSCRS, Knee Society Clinical Rating System.