Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing a Novel Motion-Assistive Device to Standard Physical Therapy for Initial Management of Knee Range of Motion after Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

Abstract

This prospective randomized clinical trial assessed a novel device for initial management of knee range of motion (ROM), pain, and function after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Primary TKA patients with preoperative ROM of at least 5° to 115° were randomized to initial knee motion management: Mizzou BioJoint Flex—novel motion-assistive device with prescribed physical therapy or standard physical therapy—prescribed physical therapy. ROM, pain score, and knee injury and osteoarthritis score for joint replacement (KOOSjr) were obtained preoperatively and 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months postoperatively. Patient satisfaction for both cohorts and subjective assessments of the MBF device were assessed at 3 months. Readmissions, reoperations, and complications were assessed through 1 year. Nineteen patients were randomized to each cohort, with no significant preoperative differences in demographics, pain score, KOOSjr score, or ROM. Six SPT (31.6%) and 3 MBF (15.8%) patients failed to regain preoperative ROM (p = 0.044). One SPT (5.3%) and eight MBF (42%) patients exceeded 125° ROM (p = 0.019) by 3 months. Total ROM (p = 0.039), pain (p = 0.0068), and function (p = 0.0027) were significantly better for MBF at 3 months. MBF patients reported significantly higher satisfaction (mean, 9.4 ± 1.1 vs. 8.0 ± 1.8, respectively; p = 0.0084). One patient in each group underwent manipulation under anesthesia. No other readmissions, reoperations, or complications were reported. A novel durable medical equipment device can provide a safe and effective patient-controlled method for initial management of knee ROM, pain, and function after primary TKA with potential clinically meaningful advantages over physical therapy alone. In conjunction with physical therapy, management with this novel knee flexion device more effectively restored knee ROM and early patient function when compared with therapy alone and was associated with higher proportions of patients regaining minimum (115°) and desired (125°) levels of knee ROM and clinically meaningful differences in pain scores, knee function, and patient satisfaction. This is a Level 1, prospective trial study.

Keywords

total knee arthroplasty - motion-assistive device - knee range of motion - prescribed physical therapy - pain scores - patient satisfaction

Authors' Contributions

All authors have read and approved the final submitted manuscript. The following is the author contribution: J.L.C., K.R., C.R.C., and T.M.G made substantial contributions to research design, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data; J.L.C., K.R., C.R.C., S.C., and T.M.G. contributed in drafting of the paper and revising it critically; J.L.C., K.R., C.R.C., S.C., and T.M.G provided approval of the submitted and final versions.

Note

This study was approved and executed under the approval of University of Missouri Institutional Review Board (#2002117).

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 26. März 2021

Angenommen: 22. Juli 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
16. September 2021

• References

• 1 Thompson R, Novikov D, Cizmic Z. et al. Arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management. Orthop Clin North Am 2019; 50 (03) 269-279
• 2 Matsuda S, Kawahara S, Okazaki K, Tashiro Y, Iwamoto Y. Postoperative alignment and ROM affect patient satisfaction after TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013; 471 (01) 127-133
• 3 Kim J, Nelson CL, Lotke PA. Stiffness after total knee arthroplasty. Prevalence of the complication and outcomes of revision. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86 (07) 1479-1484
• 4 Maloney WJ. The stiff total knee arthroplasty: evaluation and management. J Arthroplasty 2002; 17 (4, Suppl 1) 71-73
• 5 Mauerhan DR, Mokris JG, Ly A, Kiebzak GM. Relationship between length of stay and manipulation rate after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13 (08) 896-900
• 6 Yercan HS, Sugun TS, Bussiere C, Ait Si Selmi T, Davies A, Neyret P. Stiffness after total knee arthroplasty: prevalence, management and outcomes. Knee 2006; 13 (02) 111-117
• 7 Ritter MA, Lutgring JD, Davis KE, Berend ME, Pierson JL, Meneghini RM. The role of flexion contracture on outcomes in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22 (08) 1092-1096
• 8 Schiavone Panni A, Cerciello S, Vasso M, Tartarone M. Stiffness in total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Traumatol 2009; 10 (03) 111-118
• 9 Seyler TM, Marker DR, Bhave A. et al. Functional problems and arthrofibrosis following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (Suppl. 03) 59-69
• 10 Hyodo K, Masuda T, Aizawa J, Jinno T, Morita S. Hip, knee, and ankle kinematics during activities of daily living: a cross-sectional study. Braz J Phys Ther 2017; 21 (03) 159-166
• 11 Ercison MO, Nisell R, Nemeth G. Joint motions of the lower limb during ergometer cycling. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1988; 9 (08) 273-278
• 12 López-Valenciano A, Ayala F, Vera-García FJ. et al. Comprehensive profile of hip, knee and ankle ranges of motion in professional football players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2019; 59 (01) 102-109
• 13 Padua R, Ceccarelli E, Bondì R, Campi A, Padua L. Range of motion correlates with patient perception of TKA outcome. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007; 460 (460) 174-177
• 14 Cheuy VA, Foran JRH, Paxton RJ, Bade MJ, Zeni JA, Stevens-Lapsley JE. Arthrofibrosis associated with total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2017; 32 (08) 2604-2611
• 15 Huleatt J, Gottschalk M, Fraser K. et al. Risk factors for manipulation under anesthesia and/or lysis of adhesions after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med 2018; 6 (09) 2325967118794490
• 16 Ipach I, Mittag F, Lahrmann J, Kunze B, Kluba T. Arthrofibrosis after TKA - Influence factors on the absolute flexion and gain in flexion after manipulation under anaesthesia. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2011; 12: 184
• 17 Anouchi YS, McShane M, Kelly Jr F, Elting J, Stiehl J. Range of motion in total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; (331) 87-92
• 18 Zhou Z, Yew KSA, Arul E. et al. Recovery in knee range of motion reaches a plateau by 12 months after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (06) 1729-1733
• 19 Malkani AL, Roche MW, Kolisek FR. et al. Manipulation under anesthesia rates in technology-assisted versus conventional-instrumentation total knee arthroplasty. Surg Technol Int 2020; 36: 336-340
• 20 Newman ET, Herschmiller TA, Attarian DE, Vail TP, Bolognesi MP, Wellman SS. Risk factors, outcomes, and timing of manipulation under anesthesia after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (01) 245-249
• 21 Stephenson JJ, Quimbo RA, Gu T. Knee-attributable medical costs and risk of re-surgery among patients utilizing non-surgical treatment options for knee arthrofibrosis in a managed care population. Curr Med Res Opin 2010; 26 (05) 1109-1118
• 22 Boese CK, Weis M, Phillips T, Lawton-Peters S, Gallo T, Centeno L. The efficacy of continuous passive motion after total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of three protocols. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (06) 1158-1162
• 23 Harvey LA, Brosseau L, Herbert RD. Continuous passive motion following total knee arthroplasty in people with arthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 2 (03) CD004260
• 24 Tucker WF, Ramzi A, Connors M. The utilization of the Knee Exerciser Pro® ROM device to enhance post-operative outcomes following TKA. Open Access J Surg 2017; 5 (02) 555658
• 25 Bhave A, Sodhi N, Anis HK, Ehiorobo JO, Mont MA. Static progressive stretch orthosis-consensus modality to treat knee stiffness-rationale and literature review. Ann Transl Med 2019; 7 (Suppl. 07) S256
• 26 Pierce TP, Cherian JJ, Mont MA. Static and dynamic bracing for loss of motion following total knee arthroplasty. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2015; 25 (04) 337-343