Keywords: Kaltenborn-Evjenth concept, total knee replacement, joint mobilization, range of motion, functionObjective: This study aimed to investigate the effect of Kaltenborn-Evjenth concept-based joint mobilization on joint restriction and functional recovery of patients with artificial knee joints.Methods: Kaltenborn-Evjenth concept-based arthroplasty was applied to patients who underwent knee arthroplasty, with 2–3 levels of intensity, for 2 weeks and measured at 6 weeks. The ROM was measured using a goniometer, and the functional level was measured using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Between-group and within-group differences were assesed using independent t-test and paired t-test, SPSS 22.0 was used for analyses.Results: The mean flexion angles in the experimental group were 125.42º ± 12.84º before intervention and 132.50º ± 8.72º after intervention; the t-test value of -5.146 indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). The average extension angles in the experimental group were -9.58º ± 7.05º before intervention and -4.58º ± 3.58º after intervention; the t-test value of -4.608 indicated a statistically significant difference(p < 0.001).The mean flexion angles in the control group were 126.25º ± 14.39º before intervention and 129.17º ± 9.40º after intervention; the t-test value of -1.743 indicated no statistically significant difference. The average extension angles in the control group were -8.75º ± 9.23º before intervention and -4.58º ± 5.09º after intervention; the t-test value of -4.239 indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001).The pre-intervention test group and control group had visual analogue score (VAS) ratings of 6.54 ± 1.61 and 6.38 ± 1.52, respectively. Following intervention, the VAS of the experimental and control groups were 5.08 ± 1.10 and 5.00 ± 1.02, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference before and after the intervention.The pre- and post-intervention VAS were 6.54 ± 1.61 and 5.08 ± 1.10, respectively; the t-test value of 5.29 indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). The VAS before and after intervention in the control group were 6.38 ± 1.52 and 5.00 ± 1.02, respectively; the t-test value of 5.41 indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001).With regards to the values of function, sports, and recreational activities, after intervention, the values of the experimental and control groups were 19.38 ± 3.33 and 21.17 ± 2.97, respectively. The t-test value before and after the intervention was 1.96, and showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05).KOOS before and after intervention in the experimental group were 12.58 ± 4.39 and 11.46 ± 4.40, respectively in Symptom; the t-test value was 2.746 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01). The Stiffness value was 5.33 ± 2.23 before intervention and 4.54 ± 1.61 after intervention; the t-test value was 3.29, and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01). The Pain value was 26.04 ± 7.90 before intervention and 24.46 ± 7.29 after intervention; the t-test value was 5.751 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). In the Function and Daily living, the value was 45.58 ± 10.64 before intervention and 43.92 ± 10.34 after intervention; the t-test value was 5.692 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). In Function, Sport, and Recreational activities, the value was 21.54 ± 3.28 before intervention, and 19.38 ± 3.33 after intervention; the t-test value was 5.160, and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). KOOS total was 126.83 ± 25.38 before intervention, and 119.08 ± 24.12 after intervention, and the t-test value of 8.715 indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001).With regards to Symptom, the KOOS before and after intervention in the control group were 12.04 ± 4.53 and 10.88 ± 3.76, respectively. The t-test value was 4.486, and it showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01). The Stiffness was 5.54 ± 2.24 before intervention, and 5.13 ± 2.23 after intervention; the t-test value was 2.198 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). The value of Pain was 25.96 ± 7.86 before intervention and 24.50 ± 7.51 after intervention; the t-test value was 4.580 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). In Function and Daily living, the value was 46.04 ± 11.19 before intervention and 44.79 ± 11.31 after intervention; the t-test value was 4.861 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). In Function, Sport, and Recreational activities, the pre-intervention value was 21.96 ± 2.74, and the post-intervention value was 21.17 ± 2.97; the t-test value was 2.744 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01). The Quality of life value was 15.46 ± 1.95 before intervention and 14.58 ± 2.02 after intervention; the t-test value was 2.984 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01KOOS total was 127 ± 24.90 before intervention, and 121.04 ± 24.19 after intervention; the t-test value was 12.523 and indicated a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Joint mobilization implemented according to the Kaltenborn-Evjenth concept applied to TKR patients had a positive effect on the patient's joint mobility range and painful knee function. In particular, both flexion and extension showed positive effects in the range of joint movement, which may have an impact on the rehabilitation of patients in the mid to long-term. Further research on rehabilitation programs, including joint mobilization, is necessary.