What aspects of pain and functional outcomes contribute to patient satisfaction 1 year after surgery within total hip and total knee arthroplasty populations? A registry-based cohort study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2026.45732Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Hip, Knee, Patient Reported Outcomes, Patient SatisfactionAbstract
Background and purpose: Patient satisfaction after total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA) is influenced by multiple factors, including patient-reported pain and function. We aimed to examine whether functional abilities or pain during specific activities are associated more than other aspects with satisfaction 1 year after THA and TKA.
Methods: This cohort study included all primary elective THAs and TKAs performed between January 2012 and June 2022 at a tertiary care university hospital. Ordinal logistic regression models were used to assess associations between patient satisfaction and WOMAC Pain and Function summary scores and items, 1 year postoperatively.
Results: 1,772 THAs and 1,323 TKAs were included. Individually, all scores and items were associated with satisfaction. However, multivariable models revealed differences in the strength of association. Global pain score (odds ratio [OR] THA: 2.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.40–3.29; TKA: 3.61, CI 2.96–4.44), pain while walking on the flat (OR THA: 1.79, CI 1.45–2.22; TKA: 1.74, CI 1.43–2.11), and pain going up or down stairs (OR THA: 1.64, CI 1.37–1.96; TKA: 1.68, CI 1.44–1.97) showed the strongest associations in both populations. Among THAs, activities walking on the flat (OR 1.41, CI 1.17–1.68), putting on socks (OR 1.29, CI 1.12–1.48), and ascending stairs (OR 1.26, CI 1.08–1.46) contributed most to satisfaction, whereas among TKAs, walking on the flat (OR 1.41, CI 1.18–1.69), rising from sitting (OR 1.32, CI 1.11–1.58), and getting in or out of a car (OR 1.31, CI 1.10–1.57) did.
Conclusion: After THA/TKA, patient satisfaction is associated with pain during basic daily tasks—especially walking and stair climbing. Key functional drivers differ by joint: socks and stairs matter for THA, rising from sitting and getting in/out of a car matter for TKA.
Downloads
References
Graham B, Green A, James M, Katz J, Swiontkowski M. Measuring patient satisfaction in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015; 97(1): 80-4. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.00811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00811
Hudak P L, McKeever P D, Wright J G. Understanding the meaning of satisfaction with treatment outcome. Med Care 2004; 42(8): 718-25. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000132398.11342.a8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000132398.11342.a8
Lape E C, Hudak P, Davis A M, Katz J N. Body-self unity with a new hip or knee: understanding total joint replacement within an embodiment framework. ACR Open Rheumatol 2019; 1(2): 90-6. doi: 10.1002/acr2.1014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acr2.1014
Moore A, Eccleston C, Gooberman-Hill R. “It’s Not My Knee”: understanding ongoing pain and discomfort after total knee replacement through re-embodiment. Arthritis Care Res 2022; 74(6): 975-81. doi: 10.1002/acr.24534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.24534
Rolfson O, Bohm E, Franklin P, Lyman S, Denissen G, Dawson J, et al. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries. Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries Report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries Part II. Recommendations for selection, administration, and analysis. Acta Orthop 2016; 87 (Suppl 1): 9-23. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2016.1181816. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2016.1181816
Kahlenberg C A, Nwachukwu B U, McLawhorn A S, Cross M B, Cornell C N, Padgett D E. Patient satisfaction after total knee replacement: a systematic review. HSS J 2018; 14(2): 192-201. doi: 10.1007/s11420-018-9614-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11420-018-9614-8
Okafor L, Chen A F. Patient satisfaction and total hip arthroplasty: a review. Arthroplasty 2019; 1(1): 6. doi: 10.1186/s42836-019-0007-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-019-0007-3
Nakahara H, Okazaki K, Mizu-Uchi H, Hamai S, Tashiro Y, Matsuda S, et al. Correlations between patient satisfaction and ability to perform daily activities after total knee arthroplasty: why aren’t patients satisfied? J Orthop Sci 2015; 20(1): 87-92. doi: 10.1007/s00776-014-0671-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-014-0671-7
Lützner C, Beyer F, David L, Lützner J. Fulfilment of patients’ mandatory expectations are crucial for satisfaction: a study amongst 352 patients after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2023; 31(9): 3755-64. doi: 10.1007/s00167-022-07301-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-022-07301-y
Ghomrawi H M K, Lee L Y Y, Nwachukwu B U, Jain D, Wright T, Padgett D, et al. Preoperative expectations associated with postoperative dissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: a cohort study. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2020; 28(4): e145-e150. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-18-00785. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-18-00785
Noble P C, Conditt M A, Cook K F, Mathis K B. The John Insall Award: Patient expectations affect satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 452: 35-43. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000238825.63648.1e. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000238825.63648.1e
Lübbeke A, Baréa C, Miozzari H, Garavaglia G, Gonzalez A, Zingg M, et al. [Lessons learned from 25 years of an institutional hip and knee arthroplasty registry]. Rev Med Suisse 2021; 17(763): 2161-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.53738/REVMED.2021.17.763.2161
Lübbeke A, Hoogervorst L A, Marang-van de Mheen P J, Prentice H A, Rolfson O, Nelissen R G H H, et al., ISAR group. Arthroplasty registries at a glance: an initiative of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR) to facilitate access, understanding, and reporting of registry data from an international perspective. Acta Orthop 2025; 96: 116-26. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2024.42706. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.42706
Whitehouse S L, Lingard E A, Katz J N, Learmonth I D. Development and testing of a reduced WOMAC function scale. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003; 85(5): 706-11. PMID: 12892194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.85B5.13681
Halawi M J, Jongbloed W, Baron S, Savoy L, Cote M P, Lieberman J R. Patient-reported outcome measures are not a valid proxy for patient satisfaction in total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2020; 35(2): 335-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.09.033. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.09.033
Tubach F, Dougados M, Falissard B, Baron G, Logeart I, Ravaud P. Feeling good rather than feeling better matters more to patients. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55(4): 526-30. doi: 10.1002/art.22110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/art.22110
Statement on ASA Physical Status Classification System [Internet]. [accessed Jan 30, 2024]. Available from:https://journals.lww.com/anesthesiologyopen/fulltext/2026/01000/american_society_of_anesthesiologists_statement_on.2.aspx (cite as: American Society of Anesthesiologists Statement on ASA Physical Status Classification System. Anesthesiology Open 1(1):p e0002, January 2026. doi: 10.1097/ao9.0000000000000002) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ao9.0000000000000002
Zahiri C A, Schmalzried T P, Szuszczewicz E S, Amstutz H C. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13(8): 890-5. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90195-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-5403(98)90195-4
Ware J, Kosinski M, Keller S D. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; 34(3): 220-3. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003
Bilder C R, Loughin T M. Analysis of categorical data with R. 2nd ed. London: Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/b17211
Baker P N, van der Meulen J H, Lewsey J, Gregg P J, National Joint Registry for England and Wales. The role of pain and function in determining patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. Data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89(7): 893-900. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B7.19091. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.89B7.19091
Robertsson O, Dunbar M J. Patient satisfaction compared with general health and disease-specific questionnaires in knee arthroplasty patients. J Arthroplasty 2001; 16(4): 476-82. doi: 10.1054/arth.2001.22395a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2001.22395a
Mannion A F, Kämpfen S, Munzinger U, Kramers-de Quervain I. The role of patient expectations in predicting outcome after total knee arthroplasty. Arthritis Res Ther 2009; 11(5): R139. doi: 10.1186/ar2811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/ar2811
Laigaard J, Aljuboori S M, Nikolajsen L, Mathiesen O, Lunn T H, Lindberg-Larsen M, et al. Chronic pain after primary total and medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a Danish nationwide cross-sectional survey. Acta Orthop 2025; 96: 814-21. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2025.44898. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.44898
Laigaard J, Aljuboori S M, Nikolajsen L, Mathiesen O, Lunn T H, Overgaard S. Chronic postsurgical pain after primary total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a nationwide cross-sectional survey study. J Arthroplasty 2025; S0883-5403(25)01249-5. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.09.057. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2025.09.057
Galea V P, Rojanasopondist P, Ingelsrud L H, Rubash H E, Bragdon C, Huddleston III J I, et al. Longitudinal changes in patient-reported outcome measures following total hip arthroplasty and predictors of deterioration during follow-up: a seven-year prospective international multicentre study. Bone Joint J 2019; 101-B(7): 768-78. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1491.R1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.101B7.BJJ-2018-1491.R1
Williams D P, Blakey C M, Hadfield S G, Murray D W, Price A J, Field R E. Long-term trends in the Oxford knee score following total knee replacement. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B(1): 45-51. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B1.28573. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B1.28573
Christensen R, Ranstam J, Overgaard S, Wagner P. Guidelines for a structured manuscript: statistical methods and reporting in biomedical research journals. Acta Orthop 2023; 94: 243-9. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.11656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2023.11656
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Marys Revaz, Thomas Perneger, Christophe Barea, Hermes H Miozzari, Didier Hannouche, Anne Lübbeke
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PlumX (by Elsevier) is an altmetrics platform that tracks and visualizes the online attention, usage, captures, citations, and social media engagement.
