Faster rehabilitation but same outcomes of same stage total knee replacement over two stage

Abstract Description

Presentation Upload :

Authors (including presenting author) :

Dr Raymond CW Wan (1); Dr Hung Yuk Wah(1) ; Dr Kwok Ka Bon (1); Dr Fan Chi Ho (1) Ms. Lo Ka Man (1) ; Ms. Wong Siu Wan (1); Ms. Chu Wing Shan Vicky (1) Ms. Yeung MH Waterie (2); Mr. Mak CH Thomas(2); Ms. Leung HW Grace(2); Mr. Cheung CT Leo (2) Ms. Poon MY Carey(3); Mr. Chan CY Kazaf(3); Ms. Lau LY Doris (3)

Affiliation :

(1)Joint Replacement Centre, Department of Orthopedics & Traumatology, Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital (2)Department of Physiotherapy, Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital (3)Department of Occupational therapy, Alice Ho Miu Ling Nethersole Hospital

Introduction :

Same stage bilateral total knee replacement ( TKR ) is becoming more prevalent worldwide. Our centre start one stage bilateral total knee replacement since 2015. One stage bilateral TKR has advantage in cost effectiveness compared to two stage; However rehabilitation outcomes comparison is yet to be demonstrated in local settings.

Objectives :

to compare the rehabilitation outcomes of same stage bilateral total knee replacement and two stage bilateral total knee replacement.

Methodology :

This is a retrospective single centre study of Joint Registry. All patients performing two knees’ total knee replacement both in 1/1/2016-31/12/2017 are recruited. Patient are seperated into two groups 1. one stage bilateral and 2. two stage bilateral total knee replacement. Two groups are compared against each other in parameters about demographics, rehabilitation performance and safety outcomes. Rehabilitation outcomes are quantified by 30 second chair stand test, timed up and go test and walking tolerance test. Number of PT sessions are compared. Rehabilitation are all by Physiotherapist of AHNH in standardised unified manner and discharge are by same criteria.

Result & Outcome :

For same stage bilateral TKR, 30 second chair stand test is advantageous 11.6 vs 10.0 cycles ( p = 0.033 ), timed up and go has better trend 13.8 sec vs 14.4 sec ( p = 0.059 ) and no statistical difference in walking tolerance. Same stage bilateral achieve final outcome with less sessions 17.9 vs 28.4 (p=0.00).