Skip to main content

Table 5 Radiological methods quality assessment of included studies

From: Does malalignment affect patient reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature

Author

Modality of image

Timing of image

Weight bearing

Protocol/standardisation

Rater reliability assessment

Outcome

Choong et al. (2012)

CT, LLR

6 weeks

Y

Y

N

Low risk

Lutzner et al. (2010)

CT, LLR

18–32 months

Y

U

N

High risk

Huang et al. (2012)

CT, LLR

6 weeks

Y

Y

N

Low risk

Blakeney et al. (2014)

CT (3D)

3 months

N

Y

N

Medium risk

Gothesen et al. (2014)

CT, LLR

3 months

Y

Y

N

Low risk

Barrack et al. (2001)

CT, LLR

At latest follow up

Y

U

N

High risk

Stulberg et al. (2008)

LLR, SLR, Navigation system

4 weeks and 2 years

Y

Y

N

Low risk

Nicoll and Rowley (2010) JBJS

CT, SLR

At least 1 year after TKR

N

U

N Senior author

High risk

Matziolis et al. (2010)

LLR

Latest follow up

Y

Y

Y

High risk

Czurda et al. (2010)

CT, LLR

At 1st follow up

Y

Y

N Independent radiologist

Low risk

Magnussen et al. (2011)

LLR

Follow up (varied)

Y

Y

Y

High risk

Bell et al. (2014)

CT

26 months

N

U

MSK radiologist

High risk

Bankes et al. (2003)

SLR

3 and 12 month follow up

Y

Y

N

Low risk

Aglietti et al. (2007)

LLR

Latest follow up

Y

Stress to assess varus-valgus stability

N

High risk

Longstaff et al. (2009)

CT

6 months

N

Y

Y

Low risk

Bach et al. (2009)

SLR

At follow up

N

Y

N Experienced radiologist

High risk

Rienmüller et al. (2012)

LLR, Axial XR

5 years

N

Y

Y

High risk

Howell et al. (2013b)

CT

2 days

N

Y

N

Medium risk

  1. We devised a 5 point checklist (Fig. 2) and all studies were assessed using this checklist to identify whether they were high/low risk
  2. CT computerised tomography, LLR long leg radiograph, SLR short leg radiograph, Y yes, N no, U unknown