BACKGROUND: Hip and knee arthroplasty has been widely carried out in various levels of hospitals. The amount of hip and knee joint surgery has increased year by year. The surgical methods and techniques have reached a difficult time. Promoting the clinical pathway is an effective method to improve the treatment effect.

OBJECTIVE: To systemically evaluate the difference between the clinical pathways and conventional pathways in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS: Clinical trials about the comparison of conventional and clinical pathways in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty were searched in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMbase, and CNKI. Study selection, data collection and evaluation of methodological quality were undertaken by two reviewers independently. The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.0 was used for data analyses.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) Totally 17 clinical trials meeting research design criteria were included in this analysis, including 13 semi-randomized controlled trials and 4 randomized controlled trials. (2) The incidence of complications in the traditional method group was higher than that in the clinical pathway group [OR=0.63, 95%CI(0.53, 0.74), P < 0.000 01]. (3) Pain visual analogue scale score [MD=1.49, 95%CI(0.69, 2.85), P=0.001], postoperative Harris hip score [MD=19.31, 95%CI(-13.98, -4.92), P < 0.000 1], and 5-year prosthesis survival rate [OR=0.59, 95% CI (0.36, 0.98), P=0.04] were better in the clinical pathway group than in the traditional method group. (4) There was no significant difference in postoperative mean deviation of mechanical axes of lower limbs after total knee arthroplasty in both groups [MD=0.00, 95%CI(-0.14, 0.14), P=0.99]. (5) Results showed that compared with traditional technique, hip and knee arthroplasty patients who entered the clinical pathway had better clinical efficacy, fewer complications and better joint function after operation.