Experience Influences the Agreement and Reliability of Tibial Component Positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty

Derek F. Amanatullah, Graham D. Pallante, Matthieu P. Ollivier, Alexander W. Hooke, Matthew Abdel, Michael J. Taunton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Poor rotation of the tibial component is associated with unfavorable total knee arthroplasty outcomes. Some surgeons utilize the tibial tubercle (TT method), while others utilize the femoral cam (Box method) as a rotational landmark during total knee arthroplasty. Our purpose is to determine the reproducibility of 2 methods for establishing intra-operative tibial component rotation, while also comparing the effect of level of training. Methods: Twelve surgeons positioned and sized a symmetric tibial component on 7 cadaver knees. Surgeons were allowed to utilize their preferred method for establishing tibial component rotation. Seven surgeons selected the TT method, 4 utilized the Box method, and 1 used both methods depending on the specimen. Repeat measurements were completed by each surgeon after a rest period. The differences between tibial tray positions were assessed using computer-assisted optoelectronic measurements. Intra-class correlation coefficients were calculated to determine inter-observer agreement (IOA) and intra-rater reliability (IRR). Results: Overall, both the Box method and the TT method demonstrated high IRR for tibial component rotation. Experienced surgeons were more consistent at establishing component rotation regardless of technique. Trainees were more consistent when utilizing the Box method (IRR 0.96, IOA 0.94) than the TT method (IRR 0.71, IOA 0.72). Conclusion: Surgeon experience influences the agreement and reliability of tibial component position. For less experienced surgeons, the Box method was more effective than the TT method for consistently reproducing tibial component rotation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1231-1234
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Arthroplasty
Volume33
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2018

Fingerprint

Knee Replacement Arthroplasties
Surgeons
Thigh
Cadaver

Keywords

  • agreement
  • Box method
  • level of training
  • reliability
  • tibial component rotation
  • Tibial tubercle method
  • TKA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Experience Influences the Agreement and Reliability of Tibial Component Positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty. / Amanatullah, Derek F.; Pallante, Graham D.; Ollivier, Matthieu P.; Hooke, Alexander W.; Abdel, Matthew; Taunton, Michael J.

In: Journal of Arthroplasty, Vol. 33, No. 4, 01.04.2018, p. 1231-1234.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Amanatullah, Derek F. ; Pallante, Graham D. ; Ollivier, Matthieu P. ; Hooke, Alexander W. ; Abdel, Matthew ; Taunton, Michael J. / Experience Influences the Agreement and Reliability of Tibial Component Positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty. In: Journal of Arthroplasty. 2018 ; Vol. 33, No. 4. pp. 1231-1234.
@article{ffd3699d95fb42e1a86c324e5326b715,
title = "Experience Influences the Agreement and Reliability of Tibial Component Positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty",
abstract = "Background: Poor rotation of the tibial component is associated with unfavorable total knee arthroplasty outcomes. Some surgeons utilize the tibial tubercle (TT method), while others utilize the femoral cam (Box method) as a rotational landmark during total knee arthroplasty. Our purpose is to determine the reproducibility of 2 methods for establishing intra-operative tibial component rotation, while also comparing the effect of level of training. Methods: Twelve surgeons positioned and sized a symmetric tibial component on 7 cadaver knees. Surgeons were allowed to utilize their preferred method for establishing tibial component rotation. Seven surgeons selected the TT method, 4 utilized the Box method, and 1 used both methods depending on the specimen. Repeat measurements were completed by each surgeon after a rest period. The differences between tibial tray positions were assessed using computer-assisted optoelectronic measurements. Intra-class correlation coefficients were calculated to determine inter-observer agreement (IOA) and intra-rater reliability (IRR). Results: Overall, both the Box method and the TT method demonstrated high IRR for tibial component rotation. Experienced surgeons were more consistent at establishing component rotation regardless of technique. Trainees were more consistent when utilizing the Box method (IRR 0.96, IOA 0.94) than the TT method (IRR 0.71, IOA 0.72). Conclusion: Surgeon experience influences the agreement and reliability of tibial component position. For less experienced surgeons, the Box method was more effective than the TT method for consistently reproducing tibial component rotation.",
keywords = "agreement, Box method, level of training, reliability, tibial component rotation, Tibial tubercle method, TKA",
author = "Amanatullah, {Derek F.} and Pallante, {Graham D.} and Ollivier, {Matthieu P.} and Hooke, {Alexander W.} and Matthew Abdel and Taunton, {Michael J.}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.arth.2017.11.012",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "1231--1234",
journal = "Journal of Arthroplasty",
issn = "0883-5403",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Experience Influences the Agreement and Reliability of Tibial Component Positioning in Total Knee Arthroplasty

AU - Amanatullah, Derek F.

AU - Pallante, Graham D.

AU - Ollivier, Matthieu P.

AU - Hooke, Alexander W.

AU - Abdel, Matthew

AU - Taunton, Michael J.

PY - 2018/4/1

Y1 - 2018/4/1

N2 - Background: Poor rotation of the tibial component is associated with unfavorable total knee arthroplasty outcomes. Some surgeons utilize the tibial tubercle (TT method), while others utilize the femoral cam (Box method) as a rotational landmark during total knee arthroplasty. Our purpose is to determine the reproducibility of 2 methods for establishing intra-operative tibial component rotation, while also comparing the effect of level of training. Methods: Twelve surgeons positioned and sized a symmetric tibial component on 7 cadaver knees. Surgeons were allowed to utilize their preferred method for establishing tibial component rotation. Seven surgeons selected the TT method, 4 utilized the Box method, and 1 used both methods depending on the specimen. Repeat measurements were completed by each surgeon after a rest period. The differences between tibial tray positions were assessed using computer-assisted optoelectronic measurements. Intra-class correlation coefficients were calculated to determine inter-observer agreement (IOA) and intra-rater reliability (IRR). Results: Overall, both the Box method and the TT method demonstrated high IRR for tibial component rotation. Experienced surgeons were more consistent at establishing component rotation regardless of technique. Trainees were more consistent when utilizing the Box method (IRR 0.96, IOA 0.94) than the TT method (IRR 0.71, IOA 0.72). Conclusion: Surgeon experience influences the agreement and reliability of tibial component position. For less experienced surgeons, the Box method was more effective than the TT method for consistently reproducing tibial component rotation.

AB - Background: Poor rotation of the tibial component is associated with unfavorable total knee arthroplasty outcomes. Some surgeons utilize the tibial tubercle (TT method), while others utilize the femoral cam (Box method) as a rotational landmark during total knee arthroplasty. Our purpose is to determine the reproducibility of 2 methods for establishing intra-operative tibial component rotation, while also comparing the effect of level of training. Methods: Twelve surgeons positioned and sized a symmetric tibial component on 7 cadaver knees. Surgeons were allowed to utilize their preferred method for establishing tibial component rotation. Seven surgeons selected the TT method, 4 utilized the Box method, and 1 used both methods depending on the specimen. Repeat measurements were completed by each surgeon after a rest period. The differences between tibial tray positions were assessed using computer-assisted optoelectronic measurements. Intra-class correlation coefficients were calculated to determine inter-observer agreement (IOA) and intra-rater reliability (IRR). Results: Overall, both the Box method and the TT method demonstrated high IRR for tibial component rotation. Experienced surgeons were more consistent at establishing component rotation regardless of technique. Trainees were more consistent when utilizing the Box method (IRR 0.96, IOA 0.94) than the TT method (IRR 0.71, IOA 0.72). Conclusion: Surgeon experience influences the agreement and reliability of tibial component position. For less experienced surgeons, the Box method was more effective than the TT method for consistently reproducing tibial component rotation.

KW - agreement

KW - Box method

KW - level of training

KW - reliability

KW - tibial component rotation

KW - Tibial tubercle method

KW - TKA

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043789635&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043789635&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2017.11.012

DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2017.11.012

M3 - Article

C2 - 29224992

AN - SCOPUS:85043789635

VL - 33

SP - 1231

EP - 1234

JO - Journal of Arthroplasty

JF - Journal of Arthroplasty

SN - 0883-5403

IS - 4

ER -