The oxford knee score minimal clinically important difference for revision total knee arthroplasty

Background: Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is crucial for interpreting meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). No previous study has evaluated the MCID for the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This study aimed to propose the OKS MCID for revision TKA. Methods: Prospectively collected data from 191 patients who underwent revision TKA at a single institution was analysed. Clinical assessment was performed preoperatively and at 2 years using OKS and Short-Form 36 Physical Component Score (SF-36 PCS). MCID was evaluated with a three-pronged methodology, using (1) anchor-based method with linear regression, (2) anchor-based method with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and area under curve (AUC), (3) distribution-based method with standard deviation (SD). The anchors used were improvement in SF-36 PCS > 12, patient satisfaction, and implant survivorship following revision TKA. Results: The MCID determined by anchor-based linear regression method using improvements in SF-36 PCS was 4.9 points. The MCID determined by anchor-based ROC was 10.5 points for satisfaction (AUC = 74.8%) and 13.5 points for implant survivorship (AUC = 73.7%). The MCID determined by distribution-based method of 0.5 SD was 4.7. Conclusion: The proposed MCID for OKS following revision TKA is 4.9 points. Patients who achieve an improvement in OKS of at least 10.5-13.5 points by 2 years are likely to be satisfied with their surgery and not require a subsequent re-revision TKA. Patients undergoing revision TKA should aim for an improvement in OKS of at least 10.5-13.5 points as a target score. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

The study aimed to determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using data from 191 patients. MCID was evaluated using three methods: anchor-based linear regression, anchor-based ROC analysis, and distribution-based method, resulting in different MCID values for patient satisfaction and implant survivorship.