Superior Sensitivity of the Forgotten Joint Score in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- Journal
- Arthroplasty today (Q1)
- Published
- 29 July 2026
- Study design
- Systematic review / meta-analysis of RCTs
- Evidence level
- Level 1, High (CEBM 1a)
- Authors
- Anand Dhaliwal, Alexander Baur, Brendan J Liakos, Muzammil Akhtar, Shaunton Stubbs, Jaspreet Sidhu
- PMID
- 42569164
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.artd.2026.102061
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Orthopedics and Sports Medicine (top studies of the week, 9 August 2026): Meta-analysis of RCTs, practice-changing for TKA outcomes
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure assessing joint awareness after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Unlike traditional PROs, it is particularly sensitive to the "forgotten" quality of the joint, correlating with patient satisfaction and long-term success. This systematic review evaluates the FJS compared to conventional PROs in assessing TKA outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library identified randomized controlled trials reporting FJS alongside other PROs in primary TKA. Studies included various alignment techniques, implants, and robotic assistance. Independent reviewers performed data extraction and risk of bias assessments. Pooled FJS scores were analyzed using random-effects models, with subgroup analyses by surgical technique and prosthesis type. RESULTS: Fourteen randomized controlled trials (1244 knees) met inclusion criteria. FJS scores ranged from 19.00 to 98.00, with a mean of 73.61. Unlike Western Ontario and McMaster Universities, Oxford Knee Score, and Knee Society Score, the FJS showed no significant ceiling effect. Chi-square tests demonstrated that FJS detected significant postoperative improvements compared to Western Ontario and McMaster Universities and Knee Society Score (P = .011 and P = .037). Subgroup analyses found no significant differences in FJS or other PROs, though recent studies suggest a trend favoring kinematic alignment. CONCLUSIONS: The FJS demonstrates superior sensitivity and avoids ceiling effects compared to traditional PROs, making it a valuable tool for evaluating subtle differences in TKA outcomes. Its ability to detect nuanced improvements highlights its clinical relevance in optimizing surgical techniques and enhancing patient-centered care. Future research should prioritize the FJS to refine alignment strategies and implant designs.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.