Skip to main content
Download PDF

Effect of osteoarthritis and its surgical treatment on patients’ quality of life: a longitudinal study

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders volume 24, Article number: 537 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the primary causes of pain and disability worldwide leading to patients having some of the worst health-related quality of life (QOL). The purpose of our study was to investigate the progression of the generic and disease-specific QOL of osteoarthritic patients going through total hip or knee replacement surgery and the factors that might alter the effect of surgery on QOL.

Methods

A longitudinal study was performed based on data collected from 120 OA patients who filled in the short version of the WHO’s generic measure of quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF) and the disease-specific Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) before and after surgery.

Results

Domains related to physical health status showed relatively lower scores in patients before surgery. Patients reported a significant increase of QOL after surgery in the WHOQOL-BREF physical domain, especially if they were from the younger group (< 65 years, p = 0.022) or had a manual job (p = 0.008). Disease-specific QOL outcome results indicate that overall patients gained significantly better QOL in all domains of the WOMAC score. Patients with hip OA seemed to have the most benefit of their operation as they reported better outcome in WOMAC pain (p = 0.019), stiffness (p = 0.010), physical function domains (p = 0.011) and total score (p = 0.007) compared to knee OA patients.

Conclusion

There was a statistically significant improvement in all domains concerning physical functions in the study population. Patients also reported significant improvement in the social relationship domain, which indicates that OA itself as well as its management might have a profound effect on patients’ life beyond the reduction of their pain.

Peer Review reports

Background

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the primary causes of pain and disability worldwide. From 1990 to 2019, the disabilty-adjusted life year of hip osteoarthritis increased from 0.46 million to 1.04 million, reflecting a total increase of 126.97% [1]. The number of OA cases, increasing with age and obesity rates and showing female predominance reached 527.81 million cases globally in 2019; therefore, it remains a major public health concern [2, 3].

The pain and disability caused by OA are associated with articular cartilage degeneration and functional restrictions [4]. Resulting from the latter, OA also affects social connectedness, relationships, and emotional well-being, thus reducing multiple aspects of quality of life (QOL) [5]. Furthermore, knee OA has been shown to be significantly associated with deteriorated mental health [6].

Health is consistently regarded as an important aspect of QOL. Health-related QOL (HRQOL) aims to measure QOL components impacted by certain diseases and effectiveness of treatment. Therefore, studies on HRQOL may evaluate the quality and outcome of health care provided or may identify applicative items [7]. Analysis of QOL data can also identify subgroups, can help guide interventions to improve the situation of those with poor perceived health and avert more serious consequences [8]. Patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain have some of the worst HRQOL with severe restrictions in their work and daily living [9]. The WHO has developed a generic measure of QOL (WHOQOL) that encompasses general, physical, psychological, social, and environmental aspects, making it ideal for measuring a broad range of factors, thus giving a more complete picture of the individual’s life and wellbeing [10]. Reis et al. have used the abbreviated version of the WHOQOL assessment tool (WHOQOL-BREF) when reporting on how significant knee pain in elderly women with knee OA affected their balance and overall QOL compared to elderly women with no OA [11]. This decline in QOL has been supported by the study of Cavalcante et al. as well [12], and even younger patients (< 50 years) have reported a poorer QOL because of OA [13].

Hip and knee joint replacement surgery is regarded as one of the most successful operations in medicine as a whole [14], leading to statistically significant improvement in QOL by 4% after 6 weeks and 13% after 6 months [15]. Post-surgical improvements in pain and function have been shown to extend over years, but examining the whole spectrum of QOL might give a more in-depth understanding of outcomes relevant for the individual [16].

While measuring of generic QOL is advantageous when assessing the overall burden of a given health problem, disease-specific measures of QOL have the advantage of being frequently more responsive and clinically useful than generic measures by measuring the frequency and severity of specific symptoms [17]. Since its initial validation [18], the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) has become a popular patient reported outcome measure used for evaluation of hip and knee OA. It has been used extensively in research studies [19,20,21] and clinical trials [22,23,24] and has been recognized by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials group (OMERACT) and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) [25, 26]. It also can also be used to classify patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty [27].

The aim of our study was to investigate the progression of the generic and disease-specific QOL of osteoarthritic patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement surgery, and the factors that might alter the effects of surgery effect on QOL.

Methods

Study design and participants.

This longitudinal study was performed based on data collected from OA patients at the Department of Orthopaedics, Albert Szent-Györgyi Clinical Centre, University of Szeged (Szeged, Hungary) and at the Orthopaedic Ward of Réthy Pál Hospital of Békés County Central Hospital (Békéscsaba, Hungary) between August 2019 and October 2020. The recruitment process is illustrated in Fig. 1. Patients with knee or hip OA scheduled for total joint replacement surgery were involved, while patients receiving unicondylar knee arthroplasty were excluded. No other exclusion criteria were set. Participation was offered to all eligible patients consecutively to reduce selection bias. The self-administered questionnaires were filled in by the patients 24 h prior to surgery. To assess the effect of the surgery effect on QOL, post-operative data collection was carried out one year after the surgery when the questionnaires were sent and returned by post because of the COVID lockdown.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram describing recruitment and progress of participants to the follow-up study

Full size image

Questionnaire

The questionnaire comprised sociodemographic data (e.g., age and gender) and QOL measuring tools.

Based on their age, participants were divided into two groups split at the age of 65 as that is the age of retirement in Hungary, making this grouping suitable to assess the effect of the disease and the treatment on both the economically active and inactive population. The level of education was considered ‘low’ if the participants had no high school degree, ‘middle’ if they had high school degree, and ‘high’ if they had a college or university degree. Based on job profile, participants whose job was physically demanding (e.g., manual labour) formed the “manual” group, while those with intellectual work (e.g., desk jobs) formed the “non-manual” group. After calculating the body mass index (BMI) (weight in kilograms divided by height squared in meters), the participants were grouped based on the WHO recommendation, as underweight (BMI below 18.5 kg/m2), normal (BMI 18.5 kg/m2 to 24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0 kg/m2 to 29.9 kg/m2), and obese (over 30.0 kg/m2) [28].

General QOL was measured by the validated Hungarian version of WHOQOL-BREF [29], which measures QOL with 26 questions in 4 domains: 1, Physical health (activities of daily living, dependence on medicinal substances and medical aids, energy and fatigue, mobility, pain and discomfort, sleep and rest, and work capacity); 2, Psychological health (bodily image and appearance, negative feelings, positive feelings, self-esteem, spirituality/religion/personal beliefs, thinking, learning, memory, and concentration); 3, Social relationships (personal relationships, social support, and sexual activity); 4, Environment (financial resources, freedom, physical safety and security, health and social care: accessibility and quality, home environment, opportunities for acquiring new information and skills, participation in and opportunities for recreation/leisure activities, physical environment, and transport). There are also two separate questions that are asked specifically about 1, the individual's overall perception of their own health and 2, the individual's overall perception of their QOL. The answers were measured by a 5-point Likert scale. In accordance with the instructions of the WHOQOL-BREF manual [30], domain scores were calculated and then converted to a 0–100 scale, whereas the results of the two separate questions were left untransformed. The higher score represented better QOL.

In order to assess the disease-specific QOL, we used the validated Hungarian version of the WOMAC [31] Index Version 3.1 numeric rating scale (NRS), which covers 3 dimensions through 24 items: Pain (5 items) during walking, going up/down the stairs, lying in bed, sitting, and standing upright; Stiffness (2 items) after waking up and later in the day; and Function (17 items) going up/down the stairs, rising from sitting, standing, bending, walking, getting in/out of a car, shopping, putting on/taking off socks, rising from bed, lying in bed, getting in/out of the bathtub, sitting, getting on/off toilet, performing heavy domestic duties or light domestic duties. All items were assessed by using a 1–10 NRS, (1 = no pain/stiffness/difficulty to 10 = extreme pain/stiffness/difficulty) totalling 24–240, where higher scores indicated increased pain and decrease function [32]. The results of the individual domains as well as the total score were later standardised to a 0–100 scale.

Statistical analysis

Data analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) version 27 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Descriptive statistics including frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation (SD) were performed to characterize the study sample. As the outcome measures had non-normal distribution, Wilcoxon tests were carried out to assess the difference of the QOL outcome measures pre- and post-surgery. To explore the role of independent variables in the results, subgroups were made based on gender, age, affected joint, BMI categories, work profile, level of education and the presence of a comorbidity. Subgroup analyses were carried out using mixed-design two-way repeated measures ANOVA. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Ethical consideration

The study was approved by the Regional and Institutional Review Board of Human Investigations in University of Szeged, Hungary (ID: 4059) and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. All subjects provided written informed consent before the questionnaire.

Results

Participants

The characteristics of the patients who we reached during the follow-up (n = 120) are shown in Table 1. The mean age was 68.68 years and the majority (85.8%) of the participants was overweight or obese. More than two-thirds of the patients were women (69.2%).

Table 1 Characteristics of patients
Full size table

Quality of life outcomes

General QOL (WHOQOL-BREF)

The opening questions of WHOQOL-BREF demonstrated patients reporting a significant increase of the perceived QOL, where score increased from 3.30 ± 0.84 to 3.58 ± 0.69 (p = 0.002) and of satisfaction with their health, the score of which rose from 3.03 ± 0.84 to 3.31 ± 0.70 (p = 0.001) after surgery. QOL outcome results indicated that the patients had significantly better QOL compared to their previous state in the physical health and social relationship domain. On the other hand, the improvement in the psychological domain was negligible, which can be attributed to the fact that the baseline values of that domain were better than those of the other domains (Table 2).

Table 2 Population results of the general QOL assessment
Full size table

While all patients reported a significant increase of QOL in the WHOQOL-BREF physical domain, sub-group analysis showed that younger patients (< 65 years) reported significantly better outcomes compared to older ones (p = 0.022). Patients in the manual job group reported significantly greater increase in the physical (p = 0.008), and psychological (p = 0.003) domains compared to the non-manual group. Regardless of the patients’ gender, age, level of education, job profile, BMI, affected joint or the presence of other diseases, a significantly better QOL scores were achieved in the physical health (p < 0.001) and social relationships domains (from p = 0.033 to p < 0.001) after the surgery (Table 3) which is in accordance with the data in Table 2.

Table 3 Sub-group analysis results of the general QOL assessment
Full size table

Disease-specific QOL (WOMAC)

Disease-specific QOL outcome results indicated that overall, patients gained significantly better QOL in all domains of the WOMAC score (Table 4).

Table 4 Population results of the disease-specific QOL assessment
Full size table

In the sub-group analysis (Table 5), participants from the younger age-group (< 65) reported significant decrease in joint stiffness (p = 0.005), and overall, a better disease-specific QOL (p = 0.05). Patients in the manual group reported significantly greater increase in physical function (p = 0.037) and overall score (p = 0.024) compared to the non-manual group. Patients with hip OA seemed to gain the most out of their operation as they reported better outcome in the WOMAC pain (p = 0.019), stiffness (p = 0.010), physical function domains (p = 0.011) and total score (p = 0.007) compared to knee OA patients. Participants who reported no comorbidities had significant decrease of joint stiffness compared to comorbid patients (p = 0.010). Regarding the connection of BMI and QOL, normal weight and overweight patients reported a significant decrease in their pain compared to obese patients (p = 0.017).

Table 5 Sub-group results of the disease-specific QOL assessment
Full size table

Total WOMAC score indicated significantly better disease-specific QOL post-surgery in all subgroups, regardless of the patients’ gender, level of education, BMI category or the presence of other diseases (p < 0.001).

MacKay et al. carried out a literary review of 13 articles assessing the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of WOMAC in patients who underwent total hip or knee replacement, and reported a MCID between 8.3–41 and 9.7–34 for pain and function domain respectively. For knee replacement they reported a MCID between 13.3–36 and 1.8–33 for pain and function domain respectively [33].

If we accept the value of MCID as 8.3 for pain and 9.7 for function domain, 83.87% and 81.25% of our hip OA patients exceeded these values. If we also accept the lowest reported MCID values for knee OA patients, 66.67% and 76.79% of our knee patients exceeded these values respectively.

Discussion

In this study, we aimed to investigate the general and disease-specific QOL of osteoarthritic patients pre- and post-surgery, and whether surgery would result in significant improvement. Disease-specific measures are considered to be more accurate for assessing immediate effects, whereas generic measures might reveal effects of the surgery in the long run as observed by Neuprez et al. [34].

As reported by other studies, domains related to physical health status show relatively lower scores as compared with psychological components in patients before surgery [35]; this result is consistent with our results.

The results indicated statistically significant improvement in all domains concerning physical functions in the study population as well as in the domain of social relationships, the latter indicating the impact of the difficulty of getting around in one’s environment.

In this study, we investigated the possible role of independent variables in the disease-specific disability functional assessment performed using the WOMAC questionnaire. According to our results, patients with hip OA seemed to gain the most out of their operation, as they reported better outcome in the WOMAC pain, stiffness, physical function domains and total score compared to knee OA patients. A similarly significant improvement was measured among participants of the working age group (< 65 years) compared to the older patients and with manual jobs compared to non-manual workers as shown in Table 5. As the latter group is heavily exposed to the degeneration of cartilage because of their profession, it is a significant achievement that they can benefit from the surgery to this extent. The success of the surgery among the working age population indicates that many of them may be able to return to their job actively, thus decreasing the economic burden of OA.

Our results regarding the effect of the surgery on QOL outcomes are consistent with other studies. Papakostidou et al. found that after TKA, all groups of patients showed a statistically significant improvement in WOMAC domains between the pre- and the 12-month post-operative assessments, and there have been no significant differences in WOMAC domains in age, BMI, education and gender [36].

On the contrary, other studies have shown opposite results regarding the effect of gender and BMI. In a pooled analysis of 1783 knee and 2400 hip OA patients, Hofstede et al. have reported that being female or having higher BMI are associated with lower postoperative HRQoL and functioning and more pain [37]. Alkan et al. [38] have also found that WOMAC pain scores are higher in female patients; however, we found no difference between the two genders either pre- nor post-surgery. It has been reported that over 50% of the patients who required total knee replacement for end-stage OA are obese [39], a ratio that we experienced as well. However, we saw no difference in improvement by BMI category either in the generic or in the disease specific QOL.

Even though the success of joint replacement surgery is indisputable, additional therapies have been shown to boost its efficacy. The results of a study by Desmeules et al. suggest that the prehabilitation programme not only can alter the physical decline caused by OA, but it can help participants to improve their level of function before surgery as well, which is an important achievement in view of the fact that preoperative physical function is a major determinant of postoperative physical function [40, 41].

Although several studies investigated QOL among patients with OA, the cornerstone of those were a disease-specific QOL instrument. To assess the general QOL, many studies chose the 36-Item Short Form Survey which do measure aspects that are linked to health and functional performance. However, WHOQOL-BREF has been shown to be a better fit for assessing global QOL and thus a better choice to gain a more comprehensive picture when investigating QOL, which we aimed to contribute the literature.

Conclusion

OA was proved to cause severe pain and disability regardless of the patients’ socioeconomic and anthropometric characteristics. The results of the physical domain of the general QOL questionnaire were consistent with the results of the disease-specific measures, and thus proved to be sensitive to the physical symptoms caused by the disease. Total hip replacement is regarded as one of the most successful surgeries in medicine today, which is supported by the results of our disease-specific QOL assessment as well as by the physical health domain of the general QOL outcomes. This success was most pronounced in case of the active population and patients doing physical labour. The fact that patients reported a significant improvement in the social relationships domain may indicate that OA itself as well as its management has a profound effect on patients’ life beyond the reduction of their pain.

Limitations

As data collection was carried out by self-administered questionnaires, inaccuracies in patients’ memories have the potential to distort our data. The limitations of our study are consistent with the nature of observational studies and the bias on patient selection, for which we tried to correct by selecting a large number of participants from two different counties of the country and by enrolling them consecutively. Although this study was carried out in two different health centres, both of them were from the South-Eastern region of Hungary, and so findings may not be generalizable to the overall Hungarian population. Also, as the study population only consisted of patients with severe OA, we cannot extrapolate our results to patients with mild or moderate OA. Postoperative data collection was carried out after the local outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, which might alter the outcome data, especially that of the psychological domain.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

BMI:

Body mass index

HRQOL:

Health-related Quality of life

MCID:

Minimal clinically important difference

OA:

Osteoarthritis

OARSI:

Osteoarthritis Research Society International

OMERACT:

Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials group

QOL:

Quality of life

SD:

Standard deviation

SF-36:

36-Item Short Form Survey

SPSS:

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

WHOQOL:

World Health Organization Quality of life generic measurement tool

WHOQOL-BREF:

26-Item World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire

WOMAC:

Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index

References

  1. Fu M, Zhou H, Li Y, et al. Global, regional, and national burdens of hip osteoarthritis from 1990 to 2019: estimates from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2022;24:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02705-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Long H, Liu Q, Yin H, Wang K, Diao N, Zhang Y, et al. Prevalence Trends of Site-Specific Osteoarthritis From 1990 to 2019: Findings From the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, NJ). 2022;74(7):1172–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Murphy LB, Cisternas MG, Pasta DJ, Helmick CG, Yelin EH. Medical Expenditures and Earnings Losses Among US Adults With Arthritis in 2013. Arthritis Care Res. 2018;70(6):869–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Heiden TL, Lloyd DG, Ackland TR. Knee extension and flexion weakness in people with knee osteoarthritis: is antagonist cocontraction a factor? J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009;39(11):807–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Corti MC, Rigon C. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis: prevalence, risk factors and functional impact. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2003;15(5):359–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Park HM, Kim HS, Lee YJ. Knee osteoarthritis and its association with mental health and health-related quality of life: A nationwide cross-sectional study. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2020;20(4):379–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Moons P. Why call it health-related quality of life when you mean perceived health status? Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2004;3(4):275–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Prevention CfDCa. HRQOL Concepts [25 July 2022]]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/hrqol/concept.htm.

  9. Andrew R, Derry S, Taylor RS, Straube S, Phillips CJ. The costs and consequences of adequately managed chronic non-cancer pain and chronic neuropathic pain. Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain. 2014;14(1):79–94.

  10. Abbasi-Ghahramanloo A, Soltani-Kermanshahi M, Mansori K, Khazaei-Pool M, Sohrabi M, Baradaran HR, et al. Comparison of SF-36 and WHOQoL-BREF in Measuring Quality of Life in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. International journal of general medicine. 2020;13:497–506.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Reis JG, Gomes MM, Neves TM, Petrella M, Oliveira RDRd, Abreu DCCd. Evaluation of postural control and quality of life in elderly women with knee osteoarthritis. Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia (English Edition). 2014;54(3):208–12.

  12. Cavalcante PA, Doro MR, Suzuki FS, Rica RL, Serra AJ, Pontes Junior FL, et al. Functional Fitness and Self-Reported Quality of Life of Older Women Diagnosed with Knee Osteoarthrosis: A Cross-Sectional Case Control Study. J Aging Res. 2015;2015: 841985.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Siripongpan A, Sindhupakorn B. A Comparative study of osteoarthritic knee patients between urban and rural areas in knee severity and quality of life. Health Psychol Res. 2022;10(3):35466.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Orthoinfo. Total Hip Replacement [02.08.2022.]. Available from: https://orthoinfo.aaos.org/en/treatment/total-hip-replacement/.

  15. Białkowska M, Stołtny T, Pasek J, Mielnik M, Szyluk K, Baczyński K, et al. The influence of hip arhtroplasty on health related quality of life in male population with osteoarthritis hip disease. Wiadomosci lekarskie (Warsaw, Poland : 1960). 2020;73(12 cz 1):2627–33.

  16. Snell DL, Dunn JA, Jerram KAS, Hsieh CJ, DeJong G, Hooper GJ. Associations between comorbidity and quality of life outcomes after total joint replacement. Qual Life Res. 2021;30(1):137–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ware JE Jr, Gandek B, Guyer R, Deng N. Standardizing disease-specific quality of life measures across multiple chronic conditions: development and initial evaluation of the QOL Disease Impact Scale (QDIS®). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Amirkhizi F, Asoudeh F, Hamedi-Shahraki S, Asghari S. Vitamin D status is associated with inflammatory biomarkers and clinical symptoms in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Knee. 2022;36:44–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dai W, Leng X, Wang J, Shi Z, Cheng J, Hu X, et al. Intra-Articular Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Injections Are No Different From Placebo in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2021;37(1):340–58.

  21. Biscaro RC, Ochoa PGG, Ocampos GP, Arouca MM, de Camargo OP, de Rezende MU. Self-Management Program (Parqve) Improves Quality of Life in Severe Knee Osteoarthritis. Acta Ortop Bras. 2022;30(spe1): e255939.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Hunter DJ, Schnitzer TJ, Hall J, Semel D, Davignon I, Cappelleri JC, et al. Time to first and sustained improvement in WOMAC domains among patients with osteoarthritis receiving tanezumab. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage Open. 2022;4(3): 100294.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Dolatkhah N, Amirtaheri Afshar A, Sharifi S, Rahbar M, Toopchizadeh V, Hashemian M. The effects of topical and oral Nigella sativa oil on clinical findings in knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Journal of Herbal Medicine. 2022;33: 100562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kim MS, Koh IJ, Choi KY, Sung YG, Park DC, Lee HJ, et al. The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the WOMAC and Factors Related to Achievement of the MCID After Medial Opening Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy for Knee Osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med. 2021;49(9):2406–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pham T, van der Heijde D, Altman RD, Anderson JJ, Bellamy N, Hochberg M, et al. OMERACT-OARSI Initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004;12(5):389–99.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. OARSI. Outcome Measures 2022 [24 August, 2022]. Available from: https://oarsi.org/research/outcome-measures.

  27. Walker LC, Clement ND, Bardgett M, Weir D, Holland J, Gerrand C, et al. The WOMAC score can be reliably used to classify patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(11):3333–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. World Health Organization. A healthy lifestyle - WHO recommendations [03 August, 2022]. Available from: https://www.who.int/europe/news-room/fact-sheets/item/a-healthy-lifestyle---who-recommendations.

  29. Paulik E, Belec B, Molnár R, Müller A, Belicza E, Kullmann L, et al. Applicability of the abbreviated version of the World Health Organization’s quality of life questionnaire in Hungary. Orv Hetil. 2007;148(4):155–60.

  30. World Health Organization. Division of Mental H. WHOQOL-BREF: introduction, administration, scoring and generic version of the assessment: field trial version, December 1996. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1996.

  31. Péntek M, Genti Gy, Pintye A et al.: Examination of the Hungarian version of the WOMAC VA3.0 index in patients with knee and hip arthrosis. [A WOMAC VA3.0 index magyar verziójának vizsgálata térd- és csípőarthrosisos betegeken.] Magyar Reumatológia 1999; 40(2): 94–97. [Hungarian]

  32. Woolacott NF, Corbett MS, Rice SJC. The use and reporting of WOMAC in the assessment of the benefit of physical therapies for the pain of osteoarthritis of the knee: findings from a systematic review of clinical trials. Rheumatology. 2012;51(8):1440–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. MacKay C, Clements N, Wong R, Davis AM. A systematic review of estimates of the minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index in patients who underwent total hip and total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2019;27(10):1408–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2019.05.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Neuprez A, Neuprez AH, Kaux JF, Kurth W, Daniel C, Thirion T, et al. Total joint replacement improves pain, functional quality of life, and health utilities in patients with late-stage knee and hip osteoarthritis for up to 5 years. Clin Rheumatol. 2020;39(3):861–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yildiz N, Topuz O, Gungen GO, Deniz S, Alkan H, Ardic F. Health-related quality of life (Nottingham Health Profile) in knee osteoarthritis: correlation with clinical variables and self-reported disability. Rheumatol Int. 2010;30(12):1595–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Papakostidou I, Dailiana ZH, Papapolychroniou T, Liaropoulos L, Zintzaras E, Karachalios TS, et al. Factors affecting the quality of life after total knee arthroplasties: a prospective study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012;13(1):116.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Hofstede SN, Gademan MGJ, Stijnen T, Nelissen R, Marang-van de Mheen PJ. The influence of preoperative determinants on quality of life, functioning and pain after total knee and hip replacement: a pooled analysis of Dutch cohorts. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):68.

  38. Alkan BM, Fidan F, Tosun A, Ardıçoğlu O. Quality of life and self-reported disability in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Mod Rheumatol. 2014;24(1):166–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Odum SM, Springer BD, Dennos AC, Fehring TK. National obesity trends in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(8 Suppl):148–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Desmeules F, Hall J, Woodhouse LJ. Prehabilitation improves physical function of individuals with severe disability from hip or knee osteoarthritis. Physiotherapy Canada Physiotherapie Canada. 2013;65(2):116–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Swank AM, Kachelman JB, Bibeau W, Quesada PM, Nyland J, Malkani A, et al. Prehabilitation before total knee arthroplasty increases strength and function in older adults with severe osteoarthritis. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25(2):318–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the management and staff of the Department of Orthopaedics, Albert Szent-Györgyi Clinical Centre, University of Szeged and the Orthopaedic Ward of Réthy Pál Hospital of Békés County Central Hospital for supporting the data collection.

Funding

Open access funding provided by University of Szeged. The research project had no funding from any organizations. The manuscript publication was funded by University of Szeged Open Access Fund (grant number: 6029). This funding enables open access publication but has no role/influence on study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and manuscript writing.

University of Szeged Open Access Fund,6052

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Public Health, Albert Szent-Györgyi Medical School, University of Szeged, 10 Dóm Square, Szeged, Hungary, 6720

    Gyöngyi Anna Mezey, Edit Paulik & Zsuzsanna Máté

Authors
  1. Gyöngyi Anna Mezey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edit Paulik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zsuzsanna Máté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: GAM, EP and ZM; Methodology: EP; Data curation: GAM; Formal analysis: GAM and EP; Investigation: GAM; Project administration: EP; Validation, GAM, EP, and ZM; Visualization, EP and ZM; Writing—original draft preparation: GAM; Writing—review and editing: EP and ZM; Funding acquisition and resources: EP; Supervision: EP and ZM. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gyöngyi Anna Mezey.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Regional and Institutional Review Board of Human Investigations in University of Szeged, Hungary (2019/4059).

Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mezey, G.A., Paulik, E. & Máté, Z. Effect of osteoarthritis and its surgical treatment on patients’ quality of life: a longitudinal study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 24, 537 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06662-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06662-w

Keywords

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

ISSN: 1471-2474

Contact us