All design s demonstrated posterior – femoral translation and external rotation in kneeling , but posterior-stabilised design s were more posterior at maximal flexion when compared to cruciate retaining .
Modern  TKR prostheses are design ed to restore healthy kinematics including high flexion .
Kneeling is a dem and ing high-flexion activity .
There have been many studies of kneeling kinematics using a plethora of implant design s but no comprehensive comparisons .
Visualisation of contact patterns allows for quantification and comparison of knee kinematics .
The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether there are any differences in the kinematics of kneeling as a function of TKR design .
Patient expectations of arthroplasty of the hip and knee.
Patient expectations and their fulfilment are an important factor in determining patient-reported outcome and satisfaction of  hip ( THR ) and knee replacement ( TKR ) . The aim of this prospect i ve cohort study was to examine the expectations of patients undergoing THR and TKR  , and to identify differences in expectations , predictors of high expectations and the relationship between the fulfilment of expectations and patient-reported outcome measures . During the study period , patients who underwent 346 THRs and 323 TKRs  completed an expectation question naire , Oxford score  and  Short-Form 12 ( SF-12 ) score pre-operatively . At one year post-operatively , the Oxford score , SF-12 , patient satisfaction and expectation fulfilment were assessed . Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed . Improvements in mobility and daytime pain were the most important expectations in both groups . Expectation level did not differ between THR and TKR . Poor Oxford score , younger age and male gender significantly predicted high pre-operative expectations ( p < 0.001 ) . The level of pre-operative expectation was not significantly associated with the fulfilment of expectations or outcome . THR better met the expectations identified as important by patients . TKR failed to meet expectations of kneeling , squatting and stair climbing . High fulfilment of expectation in both THR and TKR was significantly predicted by young age , greater improvements in Oxford score and high pre-operative mental health scores . The fulfilment of expectations was highly correlated with satisfaction
All design s demonstrated posterior – femoral translation and external rotation in kneeling , but posterior-stabilised design s were more posterior at maximal flexion when compared to cruciate retaining .
Modern  TKR prostheses are design ed to restore healthy kinematics including high flexion .
Kneeling is a dem and ing high-flexion activity .
There have been many studies of kneeling kinematics using a plethora of implant design s but no comprehensive comparisons .
Visualisation of contact patterns allows for quantification and comparison of knee kinematics .
The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether there are any differences in the kinematics of kneeling as a function of TKR design .