429 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20962195)
1. Limitations of the Knee Society Score in evaluating outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty.
Ghanem E; Pawasarat I; Lindsay A; May L; Azzam K; Joshi A; Parvizi J
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2010 Oct; 92(14):2445-51. PubMed ID: 20962195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC.
Lingard EA; Katz JN; Wright RJ; Wright EA; Sledge CB;
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2001 Dec; 83(12):1856-64. PubMed ID: 11741066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Sensitivity to Change of a Computer Adaptive Testing Instrument for Outcome Measurement After Hip and Knee Arthroplasty and Periacetabular Osteotomy.
McDonough CM; Stoiber E; Tomek IM; Ni P; Kim YJ; Tian F; Jette AM
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther; 2016 Sep; 46(9):756-67. PubMed ID: 27494055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Predictors of functional outcome after revision total knee arthroplasty following aseptic failure.
Kasmire KE; Rasouli MR; Mortazavi SM; Sharkey PF; Parvizi J
Knee; 2014 Jan; 21(1):264-7. PubMed ID: 23159149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Crosscultural Adaptation and Validation of the Korean Version of the New Knee Society Knee Scoring System.
Kim SJ; Basur MS; Park CK; Chong S; Kang YG; Kim MJ; Jeong JS; Kim TK
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Jun; 475(6):1629-1639. PubMed ID: 28265885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Patterns of functional improvement after revision knee arthroplasty.
Ghomrawi HM; Kane RL; Eberly LE; Bershadsky B; Saleh KJ;
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2009 Dec; 91(12):2838-45. PubMed ID: 19952245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. What is the Responsiveness and Respondent Burden of the New Knee Society Score?
Maniar RN; Maniar PR; Chanda D; Gajbhare D; Chouhan T
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2017 Sep; 475(9):2218-2227. PubMed ID: 28378275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. German short musculoskeletal function assessment questionnaire (SMFA-D): comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC in a prospective evaluation in patients with primary osteoarthritis undergoing total knee arthroplasty.
Kirschner S; Walther M; Böhm D; Matzer M; Heesen T; Faller H; König A
Rheumatol Int; 2003 Jan; 23(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 12548437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Quality of life outcomes in revision versus primary total knee arthroplasty.
Greidanus NV; Peterson RC; Masri BA; Garbuz DS
J Arthroplasty; 2011 Jun; 26(4):615-20. PubMed ID: 20541360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Predictors of functional outcome two years following revision hip arthroplasty.
Davis AM; Agnidis Z; Badley E; Kiss A; Waddell JP; Gross AE
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2006 Apr; 88(4):685-91. PubMed ID: 16595456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Patient-reported outcome measures versus inertial performance-based outcome measures: A prospective study in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty.
Bolink SA; Grimm B; Heyligers IC
Knee; 2015 Dec; 22(6):618-23. PubMed ID: 26032657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement.
Roos EM; Toksvig-Larsen S
Health Qual Life Outcomes; 2003 May; 1():17. PubMed ID: 12801417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [II. Validity and sensitivity to change of the Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment Questionnaire in primary gonarthrosis and total endoprosthetic joint replacement].
König A; Walther M; Matzer M; Heesen T; Kirschner S; Faller H
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb; 2000; 138(4):302-5. PubMed ID: 11033896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A new prediction model for patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty and the roles of different scoring systems: a retrospective cohort study.
Liu J; Yang Y; Wan S; Yao Z; Zhang Y; Zhang Y; Shi P; Zhang C
J Orthop Surg Res; 2021 May; 16(1):329. PubMed ID: 34016153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The rate and predictors of patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty are influenced by the focus of the question: a standard satisfaction question is required.
Clement ND; Bardgett M; Weir D; Holland J; Gerrand C; Deehan DJ
Bone Joint J; 2018 Jun; 100-B(6):740-748. PubMed ID: 29855236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Outcome following knee arthroplasty beyond 15 years.
Loughead JM; Malhan K; Mitchell SY; Pinder IM; McCaskie AW; Deehan DJ; Lingard EA
Knee; 2008 Mar; 15(2):85-90. PubMed ID: 18249124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Three groups of dissatisfied patients exist after total knee arthroplasty: early, persistent, and late.
Clement ND; Bardgett M; Weir D; Holland J; Gerrand C; Deehan DJ
Bone Joint J; 2018 Feb; 100-B(2):161-169. PubMed ID: 29437057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact of psychological distress on pain and function following knee arthroplasty.
Lingard EA; Riddle DL
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2007 Jun; 89(6):1161-9. PubMed ID: 17545417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Outcome following subluxation of mobile articulating spacers in two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty.
Lanting BA; Lau A; Teeter MG; Howard JL
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2017 Mar; 137(3):375-380. PubMed ID: 28161774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Translation and Validation of the German New Knee Society Scoring System.
Kayaalp ME; Keller T; Fitz W; Scuderi GR; Becker R
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2019 Feb; 477(2):383-393. PubMed ID: 30418278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
