Clinical outcome after total knee replacement

concept of resurfacing the distal femur and proximal tibia has not changed much, and the majority of implants is still placed perpendicular to the mechanical axis. However, numerous designs have been developed over the last 40 years with the aim of achieving more natural knee kinematics. How much does the implant design affect our clinical outcome? Should we use, for instance, a fixed or a mobile design? The prospectively designed study published in the current issue did not show any difference in clinical outcome between the two designs according to the Oxford Knee Score, American Knee Society Score, Short Form-12 and range of motion [3]. The finding is in line with the Cochrane Review published earlier this year [7]. The authors of the Cochrane Review also stated that there is still a lack of evidence because many of these studies are rather of low or moderate quality. Clinical research is very demanding for different reasons. First, the study needs to be very well designed in order to be able to answer the question of interest, which should be expressed in the author’s hypothesis. Secondly, patients have to be selected and followed up for a long time. This requires good compliance by the patients. Some of them may drop out, which The majority of studies in the field of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) analyses patients’ clinical outcome and function. The current issue provides an update on clinical outcome taking different aspects into consideration. These studies are very important in order to learn more about patients’ satisfaction and functional performance after joint replacement. Findings will help in identifying the most relevant aspects for successful TKA. The