NIH Public Access

Author Manuscript
Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
Published in final edited form as:
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Ann Intern Med. 2011 December 6; 155(11): 725–732. doi:

10.1059/0003-4819-155-11-201112060-00004.

Increasing Prevalence of Knee Pain and Symptomatic Knee

Osteoarthritis
Uyen-Sa D. T. Nguyen, DSc1, Yuqing Zhang, DSc1, Yanyan Zhu, PhD1, Jingbo Niu, MD,
DSc1, Bin Zhang, ScD1, Piran Aliabadi, MD2, and David T. Felson, MD, MPH1
1Boston University School of Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology Research & Training Unit

2Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA

Abstract
Background—Recent surge in knee replacements has been assumed to be due to aging and
increased obesity of the US population.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Objectives—We described the trend in prevalences of knee pain and symptomatic knee
osteoarthritis and assessed whether age, obesity, and change in radiographic osteoarthritis
explained this trend.
Design—We used data from six National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES)
between 1971 and 2004 and from three examination periods in the Framingham Osteoarthritis
(FOA) Study between 1983 through 2005 (Original cohort 1983–5 and 1992–5, Offspring 1992–5
and 2002–5, and a Community sample 2002–5).
Setting—NHANES included nationally representative samples of the non-institutionalized US
population, and the Framingham Study was a population-based cohort.
Participants—We included data from NHANES participants 60 to 74 years of age, of White or
Black race, and data from Framingham Study of mostly White participants, 70 years or older.
Measurements—Subjects in NHANES were asked about pain in or around the knee on most
days. In the Framingham Study, subjects were asked about knee pain and had bilateral weight-
bearing anteroposterior knee x-rays to define radiographic osteoarthritis. We used radiographic
evidence and pain to define symptomatic osteoarthritis. We used marginal standardization with
logistic regression first to calculate age-adjusted, and then age and BMI-adjusted prevalence by
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

sex, and compared the adjusted prevalence of knee pain and osteoarthritis at later exams with
earlier exams using the ratio of the prevalence estimates.

Corresponding Author: David T. Felson, MD, MPH, Boston University School of Medicine, Clinical Epidemiology Research and
Training Unit, 650 Albany Street, Suite X200, Boston, MA 02118, dfelson@[Link]; P: 617-638-5180; F:617-638-5239.
The following coauthors share the same postal address as the corresponding author as stated below: Uyen-Sa D. T. Nguyen, DSc;
Yuqing Zhang, DSc; Yanyan Zhu, PhD; Jingbo Niu, MD, DSc; Bin Zhang, ScD; David T. Felson, MD, MPH (Corresponding Author/
Reprint Request) Postal Address: Boston University School of Medicine Clinical Epidemiology Research and Training Unit 650
Albany Street, Suite X200, Boston, MA 02118
Piran Aliabadi, MD: Brigham and Women’s Hospital Department of Radiology 75 Francis Street Boston, MA 02115
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
Authors’ Contributions:
UDTN helped to design the study, contributed to the data analysis and statistical interpretation, and drafted the manuscript. YQZ
helped to conceive and design the study, contributed to the data acquisition, analysis and statistical interpretation, and critically
reviewed the manuscript. YZ, JN, BZ, and PA each helped with particular aspects of data preparation, analysis and interpretation,
and contributed to the critical review of the manuscript. DTF led the conception of the study, contributed to data acquisition and
interpretation of the data, and helped to draft and revise the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
 Nguyen et al. Page 2

Results—The age-adjusted prevalence of knee pain and symptomatic osteoarthritis increased

over time in all samples studied. With adjustment for both age and BMI the prevalence of knee
pain increased by about 65% in NHANES from 1974 to 1994 among Non-Hispanic White and
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Mexican men and women and among African American women. In the Framingham Osteoarthritis
(FOA) Study, the age and body mass index (BMI)-adjusted prevalences of knee pain and
symptomatic knee osteoarthritis approximately doubled in women and tripled in men over a 20-
year period. No such increasing trend was observed in radiographic osteoarthritis prevalence in
Framingham subjects. After age adjustment, additionally adjusting for BMI resulted in a 10–25%
decrease in the prevalence ratios for knee pain and symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.
Limitations—We cannot rule out differences in sampling of Framingham subjects over time or
birth cohort effects (generational factors) as possible explanations of the increased reporting of
knee pain. Increases in prevalence at the last time period in Framingham might be due to
differences in cohort membership by time period.
Conclusions—Results suggest that independent of age and BMI prevalence of knee pain has
increased substantially over a 20–year period. Obesity accounted for only part of this increase. In
the FOA Study, there was an increase in symptomatic osteoarthritis but no increase in
radiographic osteoarthritis.
Primary Funding Source—The American College of Rheumatology Research and Education
Foundation Rheumatology Scientist Development Award, NIH AR47785 and AG18393, and
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

NHLBI, Framingham Heart Study (NHLBI/NIH Contract #N01-HC-25195) and the Boston
University School of Medicine.

INTRODUCTION
Frequent knee pain affects approximately 25% of adults, limits function and mobility, and
impairs quality of life (1, 2, 3, 4), with osteoarthritis as the most common cause of knee pain
in people 50 years or older (5). Among those with knee osteoarthritis, knee pain is a major
reason for knee replacements.

The rate of knee replacements has surged in recent years. From 1991 to 2006, the age-
standardized rates of total knee replacement (TKR) in the United Kingdom more than tripled
in women (from 42.5 to 138.7 per 100,000 person-years) and in men (from 28.7 to 99.4 per
100,000 person-years) (6). In the U.S., the rate of knee replacements among individuals
aged ≥ 65 years increased about eight-fold from 1979 (10 per 10,000 population) to 2002
(80 per 10,000 population) (7). By 2006, the rate increased further to 87 per 10,000
population in this age group (8). While this increase may be due to an increase in prevalence
of knee pain or symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, we know of no assessment of the secular
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

trend of knee pain and symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

Obesity is a strong risk factor for knee pain and both aging and obesity increase the risk of
symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (4, 9). Given the increase in the prevalence of obesity and
population aging, one would expect prevalence of knee pain and symptomatic knee
osteoarthritis to also increase. We described the prevalence of knee pain and symptomatic
knee osteoarthritis over the past 20 years using data from NHANES and Framingham
Osteoarthritis (FOA) Studies. We examined whether a change in prevalence of knee pain
and symptomatic osteoarthritis could be attributed to age, body mass index (BMI), and
radiographic knee osteoarthritis.

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 3

METHODS
Population
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)—Cross-sectional

surveys of nationally representative samples of the non-institutionalized US population were
conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics. Surveys have been conducted in
waves from 1971–75 (NHANES I (10)), 1976–80 (NHANES II (11)), 1988–1994
(NHANES III (12)), as well as the continuous NHANES from 1999–2000 (13), 2001–02
(14), and 2003–04 (15,16).

In a supplemental survey for NHANES I (1974–1975) (17) and NHANES II, participants
from 60 to 74 years were asked about knee pain. The age range was greater in NHANES III
and later surveys, but to be consistent, we restricted all NHANES data analysis to people 60
to 74 years. Moreover, in the first 2 NHANES, White and Mexican Americans were
classified as one racial group; thus, our White group included Mexican Americans across all
time points. We also explored knee pain among African Americans.

FOA Study—Participants included members of the Framingham Heart Study (Original

Cohort), the Framingham Offspring Study (Offspring Cohort), and a newly recruited cohort
from the community of Framingham, Massachusetts (Community Cohort). The FOA Study
(18–21) was an ancillary study of the Framingham Heart Study, a population-based study of
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

risk factors for cardiovascular disease with biennial examinations beginning in 1948. At the
18th biennial examination (1983–85), 1805 participants from the Original Cohort were
evaluated for the presence of knee osteoarthritis. These individuals were similar in age, sex,
and knee symptoms to those from the parent Heart Study. At the 22nd examination (1992–
93), the osteoarthritis assessment was repeated for this group. The Framingham Offspring
Study began in 1971–1975 and included surviving descendants of original Heart Study
cohort and spouses of those descendants. As part of a callback visit between 1992 and 1995,
1779 Offspring members were evaluated for knee osteoarthritis. This assessment was
repeated between 2002 and 2005 for the Offspring Cohort. The Community Cohort
consisted of 1039 members randomly selected from the Framingham population but
excluded members of the Heart Study. Individuals from the Community Cohort (all age 50
years of over) were evaluated for osteoarthritis between 2002 and 2005. Although a history
of a bilateral TKR or rheumatoid arthritis precluded participation, selection was not based
on presence or absence of knee pain or osteoarthritis. The institutional review board of
Boston University Medical Center approved the study. The majority of subjects in the FOA
Study were White.

Outcomes
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Knee Pain Assessment—Data on knee pain were collected in six NHANES (i.e., I, II,
III, and the three later surveys labeled as the ‘continuous NHANES’). For the first three
surveys, subjects were asked about pain in or around the knee on most days for at least one
month or six weeks. Also in the first two NHANES, those who answered “no” to a screening
question on pain or aching in any joints on most days and therefore did not provide a
response for the subsequent knee pain question (375 and 623 persons, respectively), got
coded as “no” for knee pain. For NHANES III there was no recoding necessary. Starting in
1999, the question on knee and joint pain in general was changed from a question about pain
ever experienced to pain in the last 12 months, in addition to symptoms that must be present
for at least one month (Table 1).

Knee pain was assessed in the FOA Study at three exams approximately 10 years apart.
Questions were asked about pain in or around the knee lasting at least one month over the

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 4

previous 12 months for members of the Original Cohort at the 1983–85 (time point 1) and
1992–93 (time point 2) exams. The Offspring was studied in 1992–95 and Offspring and
Community cohorts were assessed in 2002–2005 (time point 3). Only the age group 70 years
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

and older was consistently studied across three periods with regard to current knee pain so
we restricted comparisons to them. Subjects were considered as having knee pain if they
responded positively to the question that knee pain must have occurred in the past 12 months
as determined by additional response to a question about the last time pain occurred.

Radiographic assessment—Framingham Osteoarthritis Study subjects had bilateral

weight-bearing anteroposterior knee radiographs. For the community cohort, weight bearing
posteroanterior views were obtained and in the Offspring, we obtained both posteroanterior
and anteroposterior views. Knee radiographic features were assessed by a musculoskeletal
radiologist using the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) scale of 0 to 4 based on the presence of
osteophytes, joint space narrowing, sclerosis, and cysts. A knee was considered as having
radiographic osteoarthritis if its KL score was ≥ 2. Additionally, we classified a knee as
having severe radiographic osteoarthritis if the score was ≥ 3. For those subjects who got
posteroanterior and anteroposterior views, we found that the method of acquisition did not
affect prevalence and for this study, used the reading of the anteroposterior view to be
consistent with earlier x-rays.

Owing to the importance of using the same definition over time, we evaluated agreement in
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

defining radiographic osteoarthritis (KL grade ≥2) between the musculoskeletal radiologist
who read films from the Framingham Original Cohort (reader 1) with reader 2 who read the
films from the Offspring and Community Cohorts. The inter-reader kappa was 0.83 (95%
CI: 0.63, 1.0).

Symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee—Symptomatic osteoarthritis was defined in

the FOA Study if the participant reported knee pain as previously defined and showed
radiographic osteoarthritis in the painful knee.

Covariates—Body mass index (BMI) was calculated from measured height and weight
(kilogram/meter2). In the FOA Study, height was measured without shoes using a
stadiometer, weight using balance beam scale without heavy clothing or shoes. Similarly, we
used measured height and weight from NHANES.

Data Analysis
Using marginal standardization with logistic regression, we estimated the standardized
prevalence of knee pain from NHANES and FOA Study, and that of radiographic and
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

symptomatic knee osteoarthritis from the FOA Study, adjusting for age (years), and BMI
(25–29 kg/m2, 30–34, 35–39, and ≥ 40 compared with <25 as referent) (22). We also
compared the prevalence of knee pain and symptomatic knee osteoarthritis from later exams
with those of earlier exams using the ratio of the prevalence estimates adjusting for age and
BMI. Bootstrapping methods were applied to estimate 95% confidence intervals (CI) around
the estimates of prevalence and prevalence ratios (22). We tested for trends in the age and
BMI-adjusted prevalence estimates over time.

For the three later NHANES, we used the knee pain prevalence from 1999–2000 as the
reference for comparisons with 2001–2002 and 2003–2004. Appropriate sampling weights
were used to account for NHANES cluster design and multistage sampling. Because
approximately10% of participants in some NHANES surveys had missing BMI, we used
IVEware within SAS which is a sequential regression approach (23) to create five data sets
assuming that BMI was missing at random. To impute missing BMI, we used age, gender,

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 5

race, education, marital status, poverty index, self-report height and weight, and self-
reported medical conditions such as heart attacks and diabetes. We then combined estimates
from the five imputed data sets (24).
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

In addition, we performed several sensitivity analyses in the FOA Study. We excluded data
from the Offspring Cohort to see if results would change. We also analyzed knee pain trend
using a different question. At 1992–95 and 2002–05 exams we asked all FOA participants
about knee pain using a different question as follows: “On most days do you have pain,
aching or stiffness in either of your knees.” We also performed an analysis of the trend in
radiographic osteoarthritis among those 60 years or older.

Two-tailed tests of statistical significance were based on α level of 0.05. Analyses were
performed using STATA, Version 11 (StatCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA), and PC
SAS, Version 9.2 (SAS Institute, Gary, NC, USA).

Role of the Funding Source

Study sponsors played no role in the design and conduct of the study including the data
management, analysis, and interpretation of the data, or in the preparation, review, and
approval of the manuscript.

RESULTS
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

For the first three NHANES analysis, we included 1382, 4342, and 3682 participants
respectively. In the subsequent three NHANES, there were 1066, 1011, and 1054
participants from1999–2000, 2001–02, and 2003–04, respectively. Also included were 902,
1132, and 671 members of the FOA Study over the three time periods. Additional
descriptive data are shown in Appendix Tables 1 and 2.

As shown in Table 2, independent of age, there was an increase in the prevalence of knee
pain over time in NHANES and FOA Studies and for symptomatic osteoarthritis in the
Framingham Study, as indicated by increasing age-adjusted prevalence ratios (PR). For
example, the age-adjusted prevalence ratio for knee pain was 3.89 for Time 3 vs. 1 and 1.49
for Time 2 vs. 1 in Framingham men, and 2.38 for Time 3 vs. 1 and 1.22 for Time 2 vs. 1 in
Framingham women. Additional adjustment for BMI among men resulted in a 10% decrease
in the PR for knee pain from 1971 to 1994 in NHANES (Time 3 vs. 1, from PR of 1.85 to
1.66), and a 18% decrease in the PR in the FOA Study from 1983 to 2005 (PR of 3.89 to
3.18), as well as a 21% of the decrease in the prevalence ratio for symptomatic knee
osteoarthritis (PR of 3.54 to 2.81). Among women, the corresponding percent decreases
after additionally controlling for BMI were 7%, 12%, and 22%, respectively.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The age and BMI-adjusted prevalence of knee pain increased by 66% in NHANES from
1974 to 1994 (figure 1), with statistically significant trends for both White men (p-
trend=0.003) and women (p-trend=0.002). In the subsequent three NHANES, prevalence of
knee pain increased further from 1999 to 2004 in White women (p-trend=0.012), while the
increase was borderline statistically significant for White men (p-trend=0.090). For African
American participants, there was also a trend toward an increase in knee pain although it
was statistically significant only in women (please see legend of Figure 1).

As shown in Figure 2, even after adjusting for age and BMI, the prevalence of knee pain
from the FOA Study doubled over a 20-year period in women and tripled in men (all p-trend
< 0.001). Moreover, among participants without radiographic osteoarthritis, the prevalence
of knee pain tripled in women and more than quadrupled in men over 20 years. The age and
BMI-adjusted prevalence of knee pain over the corresponding three time periods was 8.0%,

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 6

10.0%, and 24.7% in women and 3.9%, 4.8%, and 16.5% in men. Among those with
radiographic osteoarthritis, the prevalence estimates were 26.3%, 31.1%, and 48.5% in
women, and 19.0%, 21.7%, and 49.4% in men. (all p’s for trend < 0.001.)
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Adjusting for age and BMI, the prevalence of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in
Framingham (Figure 3) approximately tripled in men (p-trend<0.001) and almost doubled in
women over a 20-yr period (p-trend=0.006). However, there was no substantial change in
the age and BMI-adjusted prevalence of radiographic osteoarthritis over this same period for
men (p for trend=0.82), and it actually may have decreased for women (p for trend=0.036).
Similarly, there was no increase in the age and BMI-adjusted prevalence of radiographic
osteoarthritis among those 60 years or older or in the prevalence of severe radiographic
osteoarthritis (K/L ≥ 3) for both men and women.

Sensitivity analysis excluding members of the Offspring Cohort showed similar trends to
those seen in Figures 2 and 3. In addition, using the query on knee pain on most days in
Framingham Study participants who were 60 years or older at examinations in 1992–95 and
2002–2005 showed a similar trend. The age and BMI-adjusted prevalence of knee pain
among individuals aged 60 years or older increased from 19.7% to 26.8% among men, and
from 27.0% to 33.5% among women. Using this knee pain question to define symptomatic
knee osteoarthritis, the corresponding age and BMI-adjusted prevalence of symptomatic
knee osteoarthritis increased from 9.0% to 15.0% in men and from 13.9% to 18.0% in
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

women.

DISCUSSION
Using data from two community based studies, we found that the age and BMI-adjusted
prevalence of knee pain over a 20 year-period has increased for Non-Hispanic White and
Mexican American men and women and African American women. In the Framingham
Study, there was an increase in symptomatic but not radiographic knee osteoarthritis.
Adjusting for age did not substantially alter the prevalence estimate for knee pain or
symptomatic knee osteoarthritis over time whereas additionally adjusting for BMI resulted
in a 10–25% decrease in prevalence ratios. In the Framingham Study, knee pain prevalence
increased over time for those with and without radiographic osteoarthritis and in both men
and women.

While our study is, to our knowledge, the first to evaluate a secular trend in knee pain,
others have examined the prevalence of arthritis in general over time. Leveille and co-
authors (25) did not find any difference in the prevalence of self-reported doctor-diagnosed
arthritis across four birth cohorts of baby boomers and their predecessors. Kopec et al. (26)
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

using administrative data reported that between 1996 and 2004, there was a 13.6% increase
in age-adjusted incidence of clinical osteoarthritis (OA) among Canadian women with at
least 1 medical visit or hospitalization for osteoarthritis (14.7 vs. 16.7 per 1,000 persons);
there was no increase in men (11.3 vs. 11.6 per 1,000 persons). These studies did not
examine knee osteoarthritis specifically.

The prevalence of musculoskeletal pain in sites outside the knee may also be on the rise. The
prevalence of low back pain increased by 31% over a 16-year period (1990–2006) in Great
Britain (27). In the United States, Freburger et al. (28) reported that the prevalence of
chronic, impairing lower back pain increased dramatically from 3.9% in 1992 to 10.2% in
2006 using data collected in a North Carolina household survey, although no such trend was
seen in National Health Interview Surveys (29). Researchers attributed the rise in low back
pain prevalence to an increasing awareness and perception of pain (27). This same increase
may explain the increase in reporting of knee pain. Moreover, people from younger

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 7

generations may be more willing to report pain without fear of being judged as compared
with people from older generations.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

The increase in knee pain in the United States we report may underlie the dramatic recent
increase in TKR found in Great Britain and the U.S. It is evidently not explained by
increasing availability of orthopedic surgeons trained to do replacements (30). TKR and
knee pain are different and, while it seems reasonable to assert that the increase in the
prevalence of knee pain translates into higher demand for knee replacement, we did not
follow our subjects to the point of knee replacement. Further investigation of the causes of
the increased rate of knee replacement is needed.

We also acknowledge that in the Framingham Study, the increase in knee pain without a
commensurate increase in radiographic osteoarthritis (KL≥2) or severe radiographic
osteoarthritis (KL≥3) cannot be easily explained. It is possible that mild forms of
osteoarthritis not visualized on the x-ray, or disease in the patellofemoral compartment not
seen on the anteroposterior film may have increased in prevalence over time. Non-
osteoarthritic knee pain could also be increasing as a result of the rise in obesity.

Our study has certain limitations. It would have been ideal to have the exact same question
about knee pain in each survey of NHANES (see Table 1). However, all questions from
NHANES I, II and III were similar and should not have produced marked differences in
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

prevalence. Unlike NHANES I, II and III, identical questions about current knee pain were
used in the FOA Study and in the later continuous NHANES examinations. Also, while the
original Cohort of the FOA Study was representative of the population-based Framingham
Heart Study and the Community Cohort was representative of the population of
Framingham, Massachusetts, some members of the Offspring Cohort were related to
members of the Original Cohort. Sensitivity analyses excluding the Offspring Cohort
showed similar trends. The Community Cohort in Framingham was recruited using random
digit dialing and subjects were not selected on the basis of having knee or other joint
problems (20). Finally, we cannot rule out birth cohort or generational effects as a possible
explanation for the increasing prevalence in the reporting of knee pain over time. If this
were the case, knee pain would be dependent on factors common to birth cohorts and not
necessarily changing in a secular fashion. Lastly, subjects from the different Framingham
cohorts may be biased representatives of knee pain prevalence from their parent cohorts and
this bias may have changed with time, with those in later examinations more likely to be the
ones with knee pain.

Despite the limitations, our study has several strengths. We assessed knee pain similarly
over three time periods in a population-based study of knee osteoarthritis in older adults.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Moreover, we could radiographically define knee osteoarthritis and were able to corroborate
our findings regarding the prevalence of knee pain in the FOA Study with that from
nationally-representative samples. Furthermore, Framingham data permitted us to extend
knee pain prevalence information from the NHANES 60–74 year range to a slightly older
group, those 70 years or older.

In conclusion, our findings suggest that there has been a marked recent increase in the
prevalence of knee pain and in Framingham an increase in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.
These increases may explain the surge in knee replacement surgeries and suggest a bigger
burden of knee pain in our society than previously thought. Even though our findings were
consistent across two studies, additional replication in other populations is needed.

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 8

Acknowledgments
We thank the Framingham Osteoarthritis Study research team, and study participants for the contribution of their
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

time, effort, and dedication. We are also grateful to the National Center for Health Statistics for access to NHANES
data. Funding for this project was provided by the American College of Rheumatology Research and Education
Foundation Rheumatology Scientist Development Award, the NIH AR47785 and AG18393, and support from
NHLBI, Framingham Heart Study (NHLBI/NIH Contract #N01-HC-25195) and the Boston University School of
Medicine. Moreover, the first, second, and corresponding authors had full access to all the data in the study and
take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

REFERENCES
1. Jinks C, Jordan K, Croft P. Measuring the population impact of knee pain and disability with the
Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Pain. 2002; 100:55–
64. [PubMed: 12435459]
2. Grotle M, Hagen KB, Natvig B, Dahl FA, Kvien TK. Prevalence and Burden of Osteoarthritis:
Results from a Population Survey in Norway. Journal of Rheumatology. 2008; 35:677–684.
[PubMed: 18278832]
3. Peat G, McCarney R, Croft P. Knee pain and osteoarthritis in older adults: a review of community
burden and current use of primary health care. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001; 60:91–97. [PubMed:
11156538]
4. Felson DT, Zhang Y. An update on the epidemiology of knee and hip osteoarthritis with a view to
prevention. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 1998; 41:1343–1355. [PubMed: 9704632]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

5. Zeni JA Jr, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L. Clinical predictors of elective total joint replacement in
persons with end-stage knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2010; 11:86.
[PubMed: 20459622]
6. Culliford DJ, Maskell J, Beard DJ, Murray DW, Price AJ, Arden NK. Temporal trends in hip and
knee replacement in the United Kingdom: 1991 TO 2006. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-
British Volume. 2010; 92:130–135. [PubMed: 20044691]
7. (NCHS) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics.
Rate of Total Knee Replacement for Persons Aged >65 Years, by Sex --- United States,
1979--2002. MMWR. 2005; 54:179.
8. Cisternas MG, Murphy L, Croft JB, Helmick CG. Racial Disparities in Total Knee Replacement
Among Medicare Enrollees --- United States, 2000--2006. MMWR. 2009; 58:133–138. [PubMed:
19229164]
9. Marks R. Obesity Profiles with Knee Osteoarthritis: Correlation with Pain, Disability, Disease
Progression. Obesity. 2007; 15:1867–1876. [PubMed: 17636106]
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health.. NHANES I; National Center
for Health Statistics (NCHS). Available: [Link]
11. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention. NHANES II; National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS).
Available: [Link]
12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health. NHANES III; National Center
for Health Statistics (NCHS). Available: [Link]
13. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health NHANES 1999–2000;
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Available at:
[Link]
14. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health NHANES 2001–2002;
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Available at:
[Link]

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 9

15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health NHANES 2003–2004;
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Available at:
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

[Link]
16. Wang CY, Haskell WL, Farrell SW, LaMonte MJ, Blair SN, Curtin LE, et al. Cardiorespiratory
Fitness Levels Among US Adults 20–49 Years of Age: Findings From the 1999–2004 National
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Am J Epidemiol. 2010; 171:426–435. [PubMed:
20080809]
17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey Questionnaire. Hyattsville MD: U.S. Department of Health Public Use Data Tape
Documentation; National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). Health Care Needs, General
Medical History Supplement, and Respiratory and Cardiovascular Supplements, Ages 25–74. Tape
Number 4091. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1971–1975
18. Felson DT, Naimark A, Anderson J, Kazis L, Castelli W, Meenan RF. The prevalence of knee
osteoarthritis in the elderly: the Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 1987;
30:914–918. [PubMed: 3632732]
19. Felson DT, Couropmitree NN, Chaisson CE, et al. Evidence for a Mendelian gene in a segregation
analysis of generalized radiographic osteoarthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 1998; 41:1064–1071.
[PubMed: 9627016]
20. Englund M, Guermazi A, Gale D, et al. Incidental meniscal findings on knee MRI in middle-aged
and elderly persons. N Eng J Med. 2008; 359:1108–1115.
21. Hunter DJ, Niu JB, Zhang Y. Premorbid knee osteoarthritis is not characterised by diffuse
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

thinness: the Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008; 67:1545–1549. [PubMed:
18218668]
22. Localio AR, Margolis DJ, Berlin JA. Relative risks and confidence intervals were easily computed
indirectly from multivariable logistic regression. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007; 60:874–882. [PubMed:
17689803]
23. Raghunathan TE, Lepkowski JM, Van Hoewyk J, Solenberger P. A multivariate technique for
multiply imputing missing values using a sequence of regression models. Survey Methodology.
2001; 27(1):85–95. Available from the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research, http://
[Link]/src/smp/ive/.
24. Rubin, DB. Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys. New York: Wiley; 1987.
25. Leveille SG, Wee CC, Iezzoni LI. Trends in obesity and arthritis among baby boomers and their
predecessors, 1971–2002. Am J Public Health. 2005; 95:1607–1613. [PubMed: 16051931]
26. Kopec JA, Rahman MM, Sayre EC, Cibere J, Flanagan WM, Aghajanian J, et al. Trends in
physician-diagnosed osteoarthritis incidence in an administrative database in British Columbia,
Canada, 1996–1997 through 2003–2004. Arthritis Rheum. 2008; 59:929–934. [PubMed:
18576288]
27. Leijon O, Mulder M. Prevalence of low back pain and concurrent psychological distress over a 16-
year period. Occup environ Med. 2009; 66:137–139. [PubMed: 19028803]
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

28. Freburger JK, Holmes GM, Agans RP, Jackman AM, Darter JD, Wallace AS, et al. The rising
prevalence of chronic low back pain. Arch Intern Med. 2010; 196:251–258.
29. Deyo RA, Mirza SK, Martin BI. Back Pain Prevalence and Visit Rates Estimates From U.S.
National Surveys, 2002. Spine. 2006; 31:2724–2727. [PubMed: 17077742]
30. Kim S. Changes in surgical loads and economic burden of hip and knee replacements in the US:
1997–2004. Arthritis & Rheumatism. 2008; 59:481–488. [PubMed: 18383407]

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 10

Appendix
Appendix Table 1
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Number of Men and Women by Study, Time Period, Cohort/Outcome

STUDY MEN WOMEN

NHANES Time Period 1974–75 1976–80 1988–94 1974–75 1976–80 1988–94

White/Mexican American 588 1829 1368 613 2070 1429
African American 91 208 447 90 235 438
NHANES Time Period 1999–2000 2001–02 2003–04 1999–2000 2001–02 2003–04
White/Mexican American 427 387 439 422 389 422
African American 108 117 94 109 118 99
FOA Time Period 1983–85 1992–951 2002–052 1983–852 1992–953 2002–052
Radiographic Knee OA 364 Original 371 Original 115 Community 537 Original 690 Original 140 Community
31 Offspring 181 Offspring 34 Offspring 234 Offspring
Knee Pain/Symptomatic OA 361 Original 359 Original 115 Community 524 Original 631 Original 135 Community
181 Offspring 233 Offspring

Number of participants who dropped out of the respective BMI-adjusted radiographic and knee pain/symptomatic
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

osteoarthritis analyses due to missing BMI data:

1
12 and 7;
2
1 and 1;
3
39 and 8;
Abbreviations: NHANES-National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys; FOA-Framingham Osteoarthritis Study;
BMI-body mass index; OA-osteoarthritis
Appendix Table 2
Mean (SD) Age and BMI in Men and Women According to Study, Time Period, and Cohort

STUDY MEN WOMEN

NHANES* Time Period 1974–75 1976–80 1988–94 1974–75 1976–80 1988–94

White/Mexican American Age 66.7 (4.1) 65.9 (4.1) 67.2 (4.2) 66.5 (4.2) 66.2 (4.2) 67.4 (4.2)
BMI 25.4 (3.8) 25.8 (3.9) 27.4 (4.2) 26.8 (5.1) 26.5 (5.5) 27.9 (5.8)
African American Age 66.6 (3.8) 66.4 (4.3) 67.0 (4.2) 66.5 (4.3) 66.2 (4.2) 66.7 (4.0)
BMI 25.1 (4.9) 25.3 (4.4) 26.7 (5.0) 27.4 (6.6) 28.5 (5.6) 30.0 (6.8)
NHANES Time Period 1999–2000 2001–02 2003–04 1999–2000 2001–02 2003–04
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

White/Mexican American Age 66.2 (4.3) 67.2 (4.4) 66.9 (4.4) 66.6 (4.3) 66.6 (4.4) 66.5 (4.3)
BMI 28.7 (4.9) 28.6 (4.6) 28.9 (5.3) 29.1 (6.0) 29.2 (6.2) 29.1 (6.0)
African American Age 66.2 (4.3) 65.7 (3.9) 66.0 (4.1) 65.9 (4.4) 66.0 (4.4) 65.3 (4.0)
BMI 27.8 (5.5) 28.4 (6.2) 28.1 (5.0) 32.0 (7.2) 31.3 (5.9) 31.9 (6.9)
FOA Time Period 1983–85 1992–95 2002–05 1983–85 1992–95 2002–05
Age 76.1 (5.2) 78.5 (5.2) 76.0 (4.5) 76.1 (4.9) 79.8 (6.0) 75.9 (4.3)
BMI 25.4 (3.2) 25.9 (3.9) 28.5 (4.5) 25.1 (4.5) 24.9 (5.0) 27.7 (5.5)
*
Average NHANES BMI based on available BMI data
Abbreviations: SD-standard deviation; NHANES-National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys; FOA-Framingham
Osteoarthritis Study; BMI-body mass index

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 11
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 1.
Sampling weighted and age and BMI-adjusted prevalence, along with 95% Confidence
Intervals, of Knee Pain for Non-Hispanic White & Mexican American Participants across 6
NHANES surveys between 1971 and 2004. Solid line is for female and broken line for
males. Test for trend from 1974 to 1994 in men (p = 0.003) and women (p = 0.002). Test for
trend from 1999 to 2004 in men (p = 0.090) and women (p = 0.012).
The corresponding age and BMI-adjusted prevalence of knee pain in African American men
from 1974 to 1994, was 12.6%, 10.7%, and 15.6%; p-trend=0.35. The corresponding
prevalence in women over the first three NHANES was 16.7%, 22.0%, and 28.7%; p-
trend=0.037. For the subsequent three continuous NHANES, prevalence of knee pain for

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 12

men was 7.9%, 16.6%, and 18.6%; p-trend=0.22. The corresponding prevalence of knee
pain in women over the later three NHANES was 13.8%, 22.2%, and 29.9%; p-trend=0.003.
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 13
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 2.
Age and BMI-adjusted prevalence and 95% Confidence Intervals of Knee Pain for
Framingham OA Study across 3 examination periods between 1983 and 2005. Solid line is
for female and broken line for males. Test for trend in men (p < 0.001) and women (p <
0.001). Framingham Osteoarthritis Study cohorts between 1983 through 2005 for knee pain
outcome: Original 1983–5 and 1992–5, Offspring and Community sample 2002–5.

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 14
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Figure 3.
Age and BMI-adjusted prevalence and 95% Confidence Intervals of Radiographic and
Symptomatic knee OA across 3 examination periods between 1983 and 2005. ROA,
radiographic osteoarthritis of the knee (Kellgren-Lawrence score ≥ 2); test for trend from
1983–2005 in men (p = 0.82) and women (p = 0.036). SxOA: symptomatic osteoarthritis of
the knee (knee pain in the ROA knee); test for trend from 1983–2005 in men (p < 0.001) and
women (p = 0.006). Framingham Osteoarthritis Study cohorts between 1983 through 2005
for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis outcome: Original 1983–5 and 1992–5, Offspring and
Community sample 2002–5; and for radiographic osteoarthritis outcome: Original cohort
1983–5 and 1992–5, Offspring 1992–95 and 2002–5, and Community sample 2002–5.

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 15

Table 1
Knee Pain Questions in the Framingham Osteoarthritis Study and NHANES
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Study Knee Pain Query by Time Period

NHANES I, II, III 1974–75 1976–1980 1988–1994
“Have you ever had pain or aching in “Have you had pain or aching in “Have you ever had pain in your
any of your joints on most days for AT any joint other than the back or knees on most days for at least 6
LEAST 1 MONTH?” neck on most days for at least six weeks? This also includes aching
weeks?” and stiffness.”
“Have you ever had pain in or around the “Which joints were painful?”
knee including the back of the knee on Knee?
most days for AT LEAST 1 MONTH?”
NHANES 1999–2004 1999–2000 2001–2002 2003–2004
“During the past 12 months, have you “During the past 12 months, have “During the past 12 months, have
had pain, aching stiffness or swelling in you had pain, aching stiffness or you had pain, aching stiffness or
or around a joint? [Do not include neck swelling in or around a joint? [Do swelling in or around a joint? [Do
pain]” not include neck pain]” not include neck pain]”
“Were these symptoms present on most “Were these symptoms present on “Were these symptoms present on
days for at least 1 month?” most days for at least 1 month?” most days for at least 1 month?”
“Please look at this card and give me the “Please look at this card and give “Please look at this card and give
joints that were affected.” me the joints that were affected.” me the joints that were affected.”
…Knee…. …Knee… …Knee…
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

FOA Study 1983–85 1992–95 2002–05

a. “Have you ever had pain lasting at a. “Have you ever had pain lasting a. “Have you ever had pain lasting
least a month in or around the knee, at least a month in or around the at least a month in or around the
including the back of the knee?” If knee, including the back of the knee, including the back of the
so, ”When did the pain start?” and knee?” If so, ”When did the pain knee?” If so, ”When did the pain
“When was the last time you had this start?” and “When was the last time start?” and “When was the last
pain?” you had this pain?” time you had this pain?”

Abbreviations: NHANES-National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; FOA-Framingham Osteoarthritis Study
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.
 Nguyen et al. Page 16

Table 2
Temporal Trend of Knee Pain and Knee Osteoarthritis in NHANES and Framingham Osteoarthritis Study
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Males Females

Time 2 vs. 1 Time 3 vs. 1 Time 2 vs. 1 Time 3 vs. 1

PR (95% CI) PR (95% CI) PR (95% CI) PR (95% CI)

NHANES Knee Pain (1971–1994*)

Crude 1.39 (1.01, 1.91) 1.86 (1.30, 2.49) 1.21 (0.95, 1.56) 1.79 (1.40, 2.33)
Adjusted for Age 1.40 (1.06, 1.92) 1.85 (1.33, 2.54) 1.21 (0.92, 1.57) 1.79 (1.35, 2.35)
Adjusted for Age, BMI 1.36 (1.03, 1.89) 1.66 (1.22, 2.31) 1.22 (0.95, 1.62) 1.66 (1.29, 2.21)

NHANES Knee Pain (1999–2004†)

Crude 1.13 (0.78, 1.69) 1.31 (0.96, 2.00) 1.42 (1.03, 1.95) 1.29 (0.96, 1.85)
Adjusted for Age 1.14 (0.75, 1.65) 1.32 (0.91, 1.65) 1.42 (1.02, 1.96) 1.30 (0.91, 1.77)
Adjusted for Age, BMI 1.13 (0.80, 1.64) 1.24 (0.89, 1.80) 1.37 (1.00, 1.90) 1.34 (0.97, 1.85)

FOA Study Knee Pain (1983–2005‡)

Crude 1.39 (0.87, 2.14) 3.87 (2.70, 5.77) 1.26 (0.96, 1.66) 2.39 (1.87, 3.08)
Adjusted for Age 1.49 (0.89, 2.42) 3.89 (2.74, 5.78) 1.22 (0.93, 1.60) 2.38 (1.88, 3.04)
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Adjusted for Age, BMI 1.31 (0.79, 2.14) 3.18 (2.14, 4.93) 1.16 (0.90, 1.54) 2.09 (1.60, 2.75)

FOA Study Knee Symptomatic OA (1983–2005‡)

Crude 1.33 (0.76, 2.53) 3.52 (2.17, 5.76) 1.31 (0.95, 1.95) 2.04 (1.47, 2.97)
Adjusted for Age 1.49 (0.80, 2.75) 3.54 (2.24, 6.46) 1.20 (0.85, 1.73) 2.04 (1.46, 2.92)
Adjusted for Age, BMI 1.36 (0.75, 2.52) 2.81 (1.72, 5.00) 1.13 (0.82, 1.62) 1.60 (1.15 2.32)

*
NHANES 1971–1994: Time 1=1974–1975, Time 2=1976–1980, Time 3=1988–1994 among Non-Hispanic White and Mexican American for
people 60 to 74 years of age.
†
NHANES 1999–2004: Time 1=1999–2000, Time 2=2001–2002, Time 3=2003–2004 among Non-Hispanic White and Mexican American for
people 60 to 74 years of age.
‡
Framingham OA Study 1983–2005: Time 1=1983–1985, Time 2=1992–1995, Time 3=2002–2005, using the query on knee pain in the past month
over the previous 12 months for those 70 years or older.

Abbreviations: NHANES-National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; FOA-Framingham Osteoarthritis Study; BMI-body mass index; PR-
prevalence ratio
NIH-PA Author Manuscript

Ann Intern Med. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2012 July 30.