Clinical Research Directory

Patient Satisfaction After Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains the definitive treatment for advanced knee osteoarthritis and continues to be performed with increasing frequency worldwide. However, patient dissatisfaction remains reported in up to one-fifth of cases, despite technically successful procedures and acceptable radiographic results. This discrepancy has shifted attention toward early functional recovery and patient-reported outcomes as more meaningful indicators of success. In response, technological innovations such as robotic-assisted total knee arthroplasty have been introduced to enhance surgical precision and reduce alignment outliers. This study aims to determine whether these technical advantages translate into improved early clinical outcomes by comparing patient satisfaction, functional results, radiological accuracy, and perioperative parameters between robotic-assisted and conventional total knee arthroplasty over one year.

Effect of Resistance Exercises on Serum IGF-1 Levels in Knee Osteoarthritis

The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate the effects of a resistance exercise program on serum Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 (IGF-1) levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Specifically, it aims to investigate the relationship between changes in serum IGF-1 levels and clinical improvement after exercise therapy, and to evaluate the impact of the presence of osteoarthritis metabolic phenotype on this relationship. Participants will be asked to complete a structured resistance exercise program for 8 weeks. Researchers will compare the pre-exercise and post-exercise serum IGF-1 levels, clinical scores (WOMAC, VAS) and radiological findings (MOAKS Osteophyte Score) to determine the effectiveness of the intervention.

Manual Arthroplasty Versus VELYS Robotic-Assisted Solution Functional Alignment Arthroplasty for Knee Osteoarthritis

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if the VELYS Robotic-Assisted Solution (VRAS) device helps to improve outcomes from total knee replacement, when compared to regular non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement in the treatment of osteoarthritis. It will also aim to review the longer-term safety and efficiency effects of using this device. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Does VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement improve patient outcomes (such as their function, satisfaction, and pain) when compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 2. Does VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement improve clinical outcomes (such as revision risk, complications, and hospital length of stay) when compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 3. Does VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement improve functional outcomes (including biomechanical motion analysis) when compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 4. What are the economic and efficiency effects of VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement compared to non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? 5. What are the human factor and learning curve effects of introducing VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement into healthcare teams? 6. Are there any differences in safety and adverse event incidence between VRAS device-assisted total knee replacement and non-robotic-assisted total knee replacement? Participants will: * Be randomised to receive a total knee replacement using either regular non-robotic-assisted methods, or with the use of the VRAS device. * Be assessed pre-operatively at the clinic, and then at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months following date of operation. At these appointments patients will answer questionnaires, receive an x-ray (pre-operatively, and at 6 months post-operatively), and a subgroup will be reviewed in the motion analysis laboratory (pre-operatively, and at 6 months post-operatively). * Have their longer-term outcomes including any revision operations monitored out to 10 years through national registry data linkage (no actual follow-up for patients after 12 months).

Feasibility of Good Boost+ for Adults Awaiting Total Knee Replacement

The goal of this randomised controlled feasibility trial is to find out whether it is possible to run a larger study of the Good Boost+ community based rehabilitation programme for people waiting for a primary total knee replacement. The study will look at how many people are willing to take part, whether they stay in the study, and whether they can follow the Good Boost+ programme as planned. It will also explore how acceptable the programme is to patients, NHS staff and leisure centre staff, and which outcome measures are most useful for a future full scale trial. The study will also look at what helps or hinders delivery of the programme in real world NHS and community settings. The main questions it aims to answer are: * How many people waiting for knee replacement surgery are willing to take part in the study * Whether participants can continue with the Good Boost+ programme as planned over the study period * Which outcome measures best capture any potential benefits of the programme * How acceptable the programme is to patients, NHS and leisure centre staff * What helps or makes it difficult to deliver the programme in practice. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups. * Usual NHS care or * Usual NHS care plus the Good Boost+ programme Participants in the Good Boost+ programme will take part in six weekly group water based exercise sessions held in local swimming pools, as well as land based exercise sessions that can be done individually or by joining a virtual group. The exercise sessions are delivered through Good Boost's digital technology, using small waterproof tablet computers at swimming pools, and smartphones or computers for land-based sessions. Physiotherapy staff will provide guidance throughout, and volunteers will offer refreshments after pool sessions to support social connection. All participants, including those receiving usual NHS care only, will be asked to complete an exercise diary, rate their knee pain each week, and complete short questionnaires at 6 and 10 weeks after joining the study.

Effects of High-Intensity Laser Therapy Combined With Exercise in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

The goal of this clinical trial was to determine whether high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) combined with exercise improves pain, physical function, and muscle strength in people with knee osteoarthritis. The main questions the study aimed to answer were: * Did HILT combined with exercise lower pain more than sham laser combined with exercise? * Did HILT combined with exercise improve physical function more than sham laser combined with exercise? * Did HILT combined with exercise improve knee extensor muscle strength more than sham laser combined with exercise? Researchers compared HILT plus exercise with sham laser plus exercise to determine whether HILT provided additional benefits beyond those achieved with exercise alone. Participants: * Received either HILT or sham laser treatment for four weeks. * Participated in a standardized exercise program. * Completed assessments of pain, physical function, and muscle strength before and after treatment.