Background: One of the disadvantages of the Impact Factor (IF) is self-citation. The SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator excludes self-citations and incorporates quality of citations that a journal receives by other journals, rather than absolute numbers. This study re-evaluated self-citation influence on the 2007 IF for 17 major orthopaedic journals and the difference in ranking using IF or SJR was investigated. Methods: Divided in a general (n = 8) and specialized (n = 9) group, all journals were analysed for self-citation rate, self-cited rate and citation density. Rankings of the 17 journals for IF and SJR were determined and the difference in ranking was calculated. Results: Specialized journals had higher self-citation rates (p = 0.05), self-cited rates (p = 0.003) and lower citation-densities (p = 0.01). Both groups correlated for self-citation rate and impact factor (general: r = 0.85 ; p = 0.008) (specialized: r = 0.71 ; p = 0.049). When ranked for SJR instead of IF, five journals maintained rank, six improved their rank and six experienced a decline in rank. Biggest differences were seen for BMC MD (+7 places) and CORR (− 4 places). Group-analyses for the IF (general: 7.50 – 95%CI 3.19 to 11.81) (specialized: 10.33 – 95%CI 6.61 to 14.06) (p = 0.26), SJR (general: 6.63 – 95%CI 2.66 to 10.60) (specialized: 11.11 – 95%CI 7.62 to 14.60) (p = 0.07) and the difference between both rankings (general: 0.88 – 95%CI –1.75 to 3.50) (specialized: − 0.78 – 95%CI –2.20 to 0.65) (p = 0.20), showed an enhanced underestimation of sub-specialist journals. Conclusion: Citation analysis shows that general journals tend to use more citations per published article and a larger portion of self-citations constitutes citations of sub-specialist journals compared to more general journals. The SJR excludes the influence of self-citation and awarded prestige by the SJR implies a different quality-evaluation for most orthopaedic journals. A disadvantage using this indicator, is an enhanced effect of underestimation of sub-specialist journals

Aim: To measure the quality of five major scientific meetings by assessing the publication rate of papers presented and recording their citation index. Material and Methods: Abstracts of podium presentations at the meetings of the Scoliosis Research Society, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, British Scoliosis Society, BritSpine and Eurospine were included. We performed a Medline search to identify publications from the abstract. We calculated the time from meeting to publication and recorded the citation rate of the articles. Results: Of 396 abstracts, 182 were published in peer-review journals – a publication rate of 46%. The publication rates of the five meetings (SRS, BSS, ISSLS, Eurospine, Britspine) were 69%, 53%, 51%, 38%, 24% respectively. Most publications were in “Spine” (55%), then European Spine Journal (11%). The median citation rate of the papers from the SRS, ISSLS, BSS, Eurospine, Britspine meetings was 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The average time to publication was 16 months. Discussion & Conclusions: Podium presentation is a valuable means for the dissemination of research findings. However, a paper in a peer-reviewed journal is subjected to greater scrutiny, and is perhaps a better indicator of the work’s merit. The average rate of publication in medicine following presentation is 45%. 1. Spinal meetings are within this range. Although the quality of the scientific work is not the only factor to determine publication, and nor is the quality of the presentations the only factor to assess in evaluating a meeting, the rate of publication and citation rate provide an indicator of the quality and scientific level of meetings

Aim: To measure the quality of five major scientific meetings by assessing the publication rate of papers presented and recording their citation index. Material and Methods: Abstracts of podium presentations at the meetings of the Scoliosis Research Society, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, British Scoliosis Society, BritSpine and Eurospine were included. We performed a Medline search to identify publications from the abstract. We calculated the time from meeting to publication and recorded the citation rate of the articles. Results: Of 396 abstracts, 182 were published in peer-review journals – a publication rate of 46%. The publication rates of the five meetings (SRS, BSS, ISSLS, Eurospine, Britspine) were 69%, 53%, 51%, 38%, 24% respectively. Most publications were in “Spine” (55%), then European Spine Journal (11%). The median citation rate of the papers from the SRS, ISSLS, BSS, Eurospine, Britspine meetings was 3, 3, 3, 2, and 1 respectively. The average time to publication was 16 months. Discussion & Conclusions: Podium presentation is a valuable means for the dissemination of research findings. However, a paper in a peer-reviewed journal is subjected to greater scrutiny, and is perhaps a better indicator of the work’s merit. The average rate of publication in medicine following presentation is 45%. 1. Spinal meetings are within this range. Although the quality of the scientific work is not the only factor to determine publication, and nor is the quality of the presentations the only factor to assess in evaluating a meeting, the rate of publication and citation rate provide an indicator of the quality and scientific level of meetings

Spondylolisthesis is common recognized spine pathology. A lot of studies targeted spondylolisthesis in the recent years, few of which have made a major influential impact on the clinical practice. To the extent our knowledge this is the first study to highlight and analyze the top 100 cited articles on spondylolisthesis through a systematic search strategy used previously in published studies in different medical specialty. The aim of this study is to identify the most cited studies on spondylolisthesis and report their impact in spine field. Thomson Reuters Web of Science-Science Citation Index Expanded was searched using title-specific search “spondylolisthesis”. All studies published in English language between 1900 and 2019 were included with no restrictions. The top 100 cited articles were identified using “Times cited” arranging articles from high to low according to citation count. Further analysis was made to obtain the following items: Article title, author's name and specialty, country of origin, institution, journal of publication, year of publication, citations number, study design. The citation count of the top 100 articles ranged from 69 to 584. All published between 1950 – 2016. Among 20 journals, Spine had the highest number of articles 47, with citation number of 5964 out of 13644. Second ranked was Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery with 16 articles and a total citation of 3187. In respect to the primary author's specialty, Orthopedic surgeons contributed to the majority of top 100 list with 82 articles, Neurosurgery was the second specialty with 10 articles. United states had produced more than half of the list by 59 articles. England was the second country with 7 articles. Surgical management of lumbar spondylolisthesis was the most common discussed topic. This article identifies the top 100 influential papers on spondylolisthesis and recognizes an important aspect of knowledge evolution served by leading researchers as they guide today's clinical decision making in spondylolisthesis

To identify the most cited British author, unit and country within Great Britain among the scoliosis and spinal deformity literature. Using methods as described by Skovrlj (2014), a search of the Thomson Reuters Web of Science was performed using the terms ‘scoliosis’ and ‘spine deformity’ from 1900 to 2013 published from authors in the following countries: UK, England, Scotland, Ireland, Wales. Additional citations searches were performed using PubMed and Google scholar. Results were sorted according to number of citations; papers applicable to scoliosis or spinal deformity were chosen. The Top 25 citations from British authors were established. 80% of papers were published before 2000. Citation counts and therefore rankings varied for each of the three citation searches, producing differences in rank of as great as 28 for the same paper. Ruth Wynne-Davies from Edinburgh ranked number one in all three searches, followed by SG Boyd, R Dickson, and M McMaster. Half of the top ten papers were published by authors from Edinburgh. The most cited author in Great Britain from all citation searches is Ruth Wynne Davies. However, the citation count of all papers varied depending on the search platform used, producing varying ranks for all other papers

Purpose: Today, numerous functional outcome tools exist to assess the patient’s ability to carry out basic and instrumental activities of daily living. Furthermore, the increase in range of mobility measures reflect differences in rating scales, scores, administration and scoring options which make outcome results difficult to assess across trials. Because of the lack of consensus among investigators, we wanted to identify the citation patterns of the functional outcomes tools used by investigators in hip fracture RCTs. We believed that the lack of proper citation is an underlying factor in the diverse usage of outcome tools. Method: We extracted the citations of disability tools from 59 Level 1 hip fracture RCTs. Disability was defined using the WHO classification (ICF). We excluded measures assessing body structure. The text and reference lists of the identified articles were screened in order to compile relevant literature on the instrument used in the RCT. Disability tools which were cited in the references were also compared to original development articles. Results: Overall 68 different instruments were identified that measured disability in the hip fracture literature. According to ICF, 47 tools measured body function alone, 13 tools evaluated activity limitations and participation restriction and 8 were composite scoring systems. We found that 34.2% of the trials did not provide any citations to the tools assessing body function. In trials measuring activity and participation, 23.2% provided instrument citations. In trials using composite scoring systems, 19.4% of the trials provided instrument citations. All of the instrument citations when provided by the investigators were found to correspond to original development articles or trials. Conclusion: The appropriate choice of a functional outcome instrument is fundamental in order to ensure that the results that are obtained reflect the patient. However, if citations of the indices and scales themselves are lacking, trial methodology and results could be informative but not replicated. In the future, we recommend that rigor in quality reporting include proper instrument citations

The aim of this scoping review is to understand the extent and type of evidence in relation to the use of guided growth for correcting rotational deformities of long bones. Guided growth is routinely used to correct angular deformities in long bones in children. It has also been proven to be a viable method to correct rotational deformities, but the concept is not yet fully examined. Databases searched include Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Google Scholar. All identified citations were uploaded into Rayyan.ai and screened by at least two reviewers. The search resulted in 3569 hits. 14 studies were included: 1 review, 3 clinical trials and 10 pre-clinical trials. Clinical trials: a total of 21 children (32 femurs and 5 tibiae) were included. Surgical methods were 2 canulated screws connected by cable, PediPlates obliquely oriented, and separated Hinge Plates connected by FiberTape. Rotation was achieved in all but 1 child. Adverse effects reported include limb length discrepancy (LLD), knee stiffness and rebound of rotation after removal of tethers. 2 pre-clinical studies were ex-vivo studies, 1 using 8-plates on Sawbones and 1 using a novel z-shaped plates on human cadaver femurs. There were 5 lapine studies (2 using femoral plates, 2 using tibial plates and 1 using an external device on tibia), 1 ovine (external device on tibia), 1 bovine (screws and cable on metacarp) and a case-report on a dog that had an external device spanning from femur to tibia. Rotation was achieved in all studies. Adverse effects reported include implant extrusions, LLD, articular deformities, joint stiffness and rebound. All included studies conclude that guided growth is a viable treatment for rotational deformities of long bones, but there is great variation in models and surgical methods used, and in reported adverse effects

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common and the indication for surgical treatment remain controversial in patients higher than 60 years old. The purpose of the study was to review and analyze the current evidence-based literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines in order to evaluate the efficacy of volar locking plating (VLP) and conservative treatment in DRF in patients over 60 years old. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of science and Clinical Trial.gov were searched from inception to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Relevant article reference lists were also passed over. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data. Main outcomes included functional status: wrist range of motion, validated scores and grip strength. Secondary outcomes include post-operative complications and radiologic assessment. From 3009 screened citations, 5 trials (539 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All trials of this random effect meta-analysis were at moderate risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Differences in the DASH score (MD −5,91; 95% CI, −8,83; −3,00), PRWE score (MD −9.07; 95% CI, −14.57, −3.57) and grip strength (MD 5,12; 95% CI, 0,59-9,65) were statistically significant and favored VLPs. No effect was observed in terms of range of motion. Adverse events are frequent in both treatment groups, reoperation rate is higher in the VLP group. VLP may provide better functional outcomes in patients higher than 60 years old. More RCT are still needed to evaluate if the risks and complications of VLP outweigh the benefits

Distal radius fractures (DRF) are common and the indication for surgical treatment remain controversial in patients higher than 60 years old. The purpose of the study was to review and analyze the current evidence-based literature. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA guidelines in order to evaluate the efficacy of volar locking plating (VLP) and conservative treatment in DRF in patients over 60 years old. Electronic databases including MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, Web of science and Clinical Trial.gov were searched from inception to October 2020 for randomized controlled trials. Relevant article reference lists were also passed over. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted the data. Main outcomes included functional status: wrist range of motion, validated scores and grip strength. Secondary outcomes include post-operative complications and radiologic assessment. From 3009 screened citations, 5 trials (539 patients) met the inclusion criteria. All trials of this random effect meta-analysis were at moderate risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Differences in the DASH score (MD −5,91; 95% CI, −8,83; −3,00), PRWE score (MD −9.07; 95% CI, −14.57, −3.57) and grip strength (MD 5,12; 95% CI, 0,59-9,65) were statistically significant and favored VLPs. No effect was observed in terms of range of motion. Adverse events are frequent in both treatment groups, reoperation rate is higher in the VLP group. VLP may provide better functional outcomes in patients higher than 60 years old. More RCT are still needed to evaluate if the risks and complications of VLP outweigh the benefits

Aims. This systematic review places a recently completed multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT), UK FROST, in the context of existing randomized evidence for the management of primary frozen shoulder. UK FROST compared the effectiveness of pre-specified physiotherapy techniques with a steroid injection (PTSI), manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) with a steroid injection, and arthroscopic capsular release (ACR). This review updates a 2012 review focusing on the effectiveness of MUA, ACR, hydrodilatation, and PTSI. Methods. MEDLINE, Embase, PEDro, Science Citation Index, Clinicaltrials.gov, CENTRAL, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry were searched up to December 2018. Reference lists of included studies were screened. No language restrictions applied. Eligible studies were RCTs comparing the effectiveness of MUA, ACR, PTSI, and hydrodilatation against each other, or supportive care or no treatment, for the management of primary frozen shoulder. Results. Nine RCTs were included. The primary outcome of patient-reported shoulder function at long-term follow-up (> 6 months and ≤ 12 months) was reported for five treatment comparisons across four studies. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were: ACR versus MUA: 0.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.42), ACR versus supportive care: -0.13 (95% CI -1.10 to 0.83), and ACR versus PTSI: 0.33 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.59) and 0.25 (95% CI -0.34 to 0.85), all favouring ACR; MUA versus supportive care: 0 (95% CI -0.44 to 0.44) not favouring either; and MUA versus PTSI: 0.12 (95% CI -0.14 to 0.37) favouring MUA. None of these differences met the threshold of clinical significance agreed for the UK FROST and most confidence intervals included zero. Conclusion. The findings from a recent multicentre RCT provided the strongest evidence that, when compared with each other, neither PTSI, MUA, nor ACR are clinically superior. Evidence from smaller RCTs did not change this conclusion. The effectiveness of hydrodilatation based on four RCTs was inconclusive and there remains an evidence gap. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):773–784

Aims. The conventionally described mechanism of distal biceps tendon rupture (DBTR) is of a ‘considerable extension force suddenly applied to a resisting, actively flexed forearm’. This has been commonly paraphrased as an ‘eccentric contracture to a flexed elbow’. Both definitions have been frequently used in the literature with little objective analysis or citation. The aim of the present study was to use video footage of real time distal biceps ruptures to revisit and objectively define the mechanism of injury. Methods. An online search identified 61 videos reporting a DBTR. Videos were independently reviewed by three surgeons to assess forearm rotation, elbow flexion, shoulder position, and type of muscle contraction being exerted at the time of rupture. Prospective data on mechanism of injury and arm position was also collected concurrently for 22 consecutive patients diagnosed with an acute DBTR in order to corroborate the video analysis. Results. Four videos were excluded, leaving 57 for final analysis. Mechanisms of injury included deadlift, bicep curls, calisthenics, arm wrestling, heavy lifting, and boxing. In all, 98% of ruptures occurred with the arm in supination and 89% occurred at 0° to 10° of elbow flexion. Regarding muscle activity, 88% occurred during isometric contraction, 7% during eccentric contraction, and 5% during concentric contraction. Interobserver correlation scores were calculated as 0.66 to 0.89 using the free-marginal Fleiss Kappa tool. The prospectively collected patient data was consistent with the video analysis, with 82% of injuries occurring in supination and 95% in relative elbow extension. Conclusion. Contrary to the classically described injury mechanism, in this study the usual arm position during DBTR was forearm supination and elbow extension, and the muscle contraction was typically isometric. This was demonstrated for both video analysis and ‘real’ patients across a range of activities leading to rupture. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):826–831

Background. Clinical guidelines recommend epidural steroid injection (ESI) as a treatment option for severe disc-related sciatica, but there is considerable uncertainty about its effectiveness. Currently, we know very little about factors that might be associated with good or poor outcomes from ESI. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize and appraise the evidence investigating prognostic factors associated with outcomes following ESI for patients with imaging confirmed disc-related sciatica. Methods. The search strategy involved the electronic databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and reference lists of eligible studies. Selected papers were quality appraised independently by two reviewers using the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. Between study heterogeneity precluded statistical pooling of results. Results. 2726 citations were identified; 11 studies were eligible. Overall study quality was low with all judged to have moderate or high risk of bias. Forty-five prognostic factors were identified but were measured inconsistently. The most commonly assessed prognostic factors were related to pain and function (n=7 studies), imaging features (n=6 studies), health and lifestyle (n=5 studies), patient demographics (n=4 studies) and clinical assessment findings (n=4 studies). No prognostic factor was found to be consistently associated with outcomes following ESI. Most studies found no association or results that conflicted with other studies. Conclusions. There is little, and low quality, evidence to guide practice in terms of factors that predict outcomes in patients following ESI for disc-related sciatica. The results can help inform some of the decisions about potential prognostic factors that should be assessed in future well-designed prospective cohort studies. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: This study is supported by Health Education England and the National Institute for Health Research (HEE/ NIHR ICA Programme Clinical Lectureship, Dr Siobhan Stynes, NIHR300441). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health and Social Care

Abstract. Objective. There is no specific framework for the clinical management of sports related brachial plexus injuries. Necessarily, rehabilitation is based on injury presentation and clinical diagnostics but it is unclear what the underlying evidence base to inform rehabilitative management. Methods. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We applied the PEO criteria to inform our search strategy to find articles that reported the rehabilitative management of brachial plexus injuries sustained while playing contact sports. An electronic search of Medline, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science from inception to 3rd November 2022 was conducted. MESH terms and Boolean operators were employed. We applied an English language restriction but no other filters. Manual searches of Google Scholar and citation searching of included manuscripts were also completed. All study types were considered for inclusion provided they were published as peer-reviewed primary research articles and contained relevant information. Two investigators independently carried out the searches, screened by title, abstract and full text. Two researchers independently extracted the data from included articles. Data was cross-checked by a third researcher to ensure consistency. To assess internal validity and risk of bias, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools were utilised. Results. The search generated 88 articles. Following removal of duplicates, 43 papers were evaluated against the eligibility criteria. Nine were eligible for full text review, with the majority of exclusions being expert opinion articles. Eight case reports were included. One article reported three individuals, resulting in data for ten athletes. The mean age was 19.8 years (±4.09). Injuries occurred in five American football players, two wrestlers, two rugby players, and a basketball player. No two studies applied the same diagnostic terminology and the severity of injury varied widely. Burning pain and altered sensation was the most commonly reported symptom, alongside motor weakness in the upper limb. Clinical presentation and management differed by injury pattern. Traction injuries caused biceps motor weakness and atrophy of the deltoid region, whereas compression injuries led to rotator cuff weakness. In all cases treatment was separated into acute and rehabilitative management phases, however the time frames related to these differed. Acute interventions varied but essentially entailed soft tissue inflammation management. Rehabilitation approaches variously included strengthening of shoulder complex and cervical musculature. Return-to-play criteria was opaque. The methodological quality of the case reports was acceptable. Four met all nine of the JBI evaluation criteria, and a further three met at least 75% of items. Conclusion(s). There is a distinct lack of evidence supporting rehabilitation management of sports related brachial plexus injury. Through systematic review we found only eight reports, representing ten individual case studies. No trials, cohort studies, or even retrospective registry-based studies are available to inform clinical management, which, necessarily, is driven by expert opinion and application of basic rehabilitation principles. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Femoral components used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) rely on good initial fixation determined by implant design, femoral morphology, and surgical technique. A higher rate of varus alignment may be of specific concern with short stem implants. Varus placement in uncemented femoral components has been proven not to be detrimental to clinical function; though long-term bone remodeling secondary to varus placement remains unknown. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients who underwent THA with one of two uncemented short stem metaphyseal engaging implants at minimum two-year follow-up. A review of 105 patients (average age 65 years; BMI 29 kg/m. 2. ) who underwent a total of 109 primary THAs using the ABG II short stem femoral implant (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ), and 160 hips in 149 patients (average age 70 years; BMI 28 kg/m. 2. ) who underwent primary THA using the Citation stem (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ). The same surgeon (SDS) performed all surgeries through a less invasive posterolateral approach. Pre-operative and post-operative Harris Hips Scores (HHS) and WOMAC scores were collected. Digital radiograph analysis was performed including measuring the stem alignment relative to the femoral shaft. A stem placed with greater than 5 degrees of varus was considered to be in varus. There was no significant difference in demographics (age, gender or BMI) or pre-operative HHS and WOMAC scores between the two groups. Follow-up HHS was 90 (range 63–100) and 94 (range 70–100) for the ABG II and Citation groups, respectively. Follow-up WOMAC scores were 10 (range 0–24) and 6 (range 0–43) for the ABG II and Citation groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in any of the scores between the two groups (p>0.05). When looking at AP radiographs for postoperative intramedullary alignment, none of the ABG II implants were placed in varus (>5°), while a small number (4.9%) of Citation implants were implanted in varus alignment. No significant difference was observed in the alignment between the two groups (p>0.05). Average post-op alignment with the ABG was 1.10° (range −4.7–4.9°) and 0.88° (range −4.5–8.9°) with the Citation. The clinical results associated with the use of these stems in patients of all ages and bone types have been identical to those achieved by uncemented stems of standard length. Both implants in this study had excellent clinical and functional results in primary THA after a minimum 24-month follow up. In addition, postoperative radiographic analysis demonstrated that these stems can be reliably and reproducibly placed in neutral alignment despite their short length. The lateral flare on the Citation implant led to a greater number of implants in varus alignment, potentially affecting offset and leg-length, yet the relative increased incidence compared to the ABG II was not significant. Further research is needed in designing implants that optimize proximal femoral contact while maintaining alignment and overall hip kinematics

Background. Author credibility and creativity is often gauged by the number of scientific papers published, with the frequency of citations for particular articles reflecting the impact of published data on the area of practice. Aims. The objective of this study was to identify and analyse the qualities of the top one hundred cited articles in Orthopaedic surgery. Methods. We used the database of the Science Citation Index of the Institute for Scientific Information (1945-1995) in addition to Scopus, Medline and Pubmed search engines. Results. 1490 articles were cited in excess of 100 times with the top 100 being subjected for further analysis. The 100 articles discussed were published between 1945 and 2005. The mean number of citations per articles was 446.5 (range 334 - 1786). The majority of published articles originated in the United States (68) with the United Kingdom and Canada closely behind (12 and 5 respectively). The 100 articles were published in 7 Orthopaedic journals led by the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American edition (JBJS Am) (n=55) followed by Spine (n=16), Clinical Orthopaedic Related Research (n=14), JBJS Britain (n=7), Journal of Orthopaedic Research (n=5), Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavia (n=2) and Foot and Ankle International (n=1). 80 of the most cited articles reported clinical experiences, 7 were clinical review articles and 13 dealt with basic science. 34 persons authored greater than one top citing article. Conclusion. Analysis of the most cited Orthopaedic papers allows us a unique insight into the qualities, characteristics and clinical innovations, required for a paper to attain the ‘classic’ status. Based on these findings to be well cited such a contribution should be published in the English Language in a high impact journal and originate in North America or the United Kingdom

Joint arthroplasty is a common surgical procedure, with over 185,000 primary hip and knee arthroplasties performed in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 2014. After total hip or knee arthroplasty, about 1% of patients develop deep prosthetic joint infection (PJI), which usually requires further major operations to clear the infection. Although PJI affects only a small percentage of patients it is one of the most devastating complications associated with this procedure. Research evidence has focussed on clinical effectiveness of revision surgery while there has been less focus on the impact on patients and support needs. Using a systematic review approach, the aim of this study was to assess support needs and evaluate what interventions are routinely offered to support patients undergoing treatment for PJI following hip or knee arthroplasty. We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cinahl, Social Science Citation Index, and The Cochrane Library from 1980 to February 15, 2015 for observational (prospective cohort, nested case-control, case-control, and retrospective cohort) studies, qualitative studies, and clinical trials that report on the support needs and interventions for patients being treated for PJI or other major adverse occurrences following joint arthroplasty. Data were extracted by two independent investigators and consensus reached with involvement of a third. Of 4,161 potentially relevant citations, we identified one case-control, one prospective cohort and two qualitative studies for inclusion in the synthesis. Patients report that PJI and treatment had a profoundly negative impact affecting physical, emotional, social and economic aspects of their lives. No study evaluated support interventions for PJI or other major adverse occurrences following hip and knee arthroplasty. The interpretation of study results is limited by variation in study design, outcome measures and the small number of relevant eligible studies. Findings show that patients undergoing treatment for PJI have extensive physical, psychological, social and economic support needs. Our review highlights a lack of evidence about support strategies for patients undergoing treatment for PJI and other adverse occurrences. There is a need to design, implement and evaluate interventions to support these patients

In 2006, approximately 1.3 million peer-reviewed scientific articles were published, aided by a large rise in the number of available scientific journals from 16 000 in 2001 to 23 750 by 2006. Is this evidence of an explosion in scientific knowledge or just the accumulation of wasteful publications and junk science? Data show that only 45% of the articles published in the 4500 top scientific journals are cited within the first five years of publication, a figure that is dropping steadily. Only 42% receive more than one citation. For better or for worse, “Publish or Perish” appears here to stay as the number of published papers becomes the basis for selection to academic positions, for tenure and promotions, a criterion for the awarding of grants and also the source of funding for salaries. The high pressure to publish has, however, ushered in an era where scientists are increasingly conducting and publishing data from research performed with ‘questionable research practices’ or even committing outright fraud. The few cases which are reported will in fact be the tip of an iceberg and the scientific community needs to be vigilant against this corruption of science

Aims. Urinary catheter use in the peri-operative and post-operative phase following arthroplasty may be associated with increased risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) and deep prosthetic joint infection (PJI). These can be catastrophic complications in joint arthroplasty. We performed a systematic review of the evidence on routine use of antibiotics for urinary catheter insertion and removal following arthroplasty. Methods. Electronic databases were searched using the HDAS interface. Grey literature was also searched. From 219 citations, six studies were deemed eligible for review. Due to study heterogeneity a narrative approach was adopted. Methodological quality of each study was assessed using the CASP appraisal tool. Included studies were found to have moderate to good methodological quality. Results. A total of 4696 hip and knee arthroplasties were performed on 4578 participants across all studies. Of these 1475 (31%) were undertaken on men and 3189 (68%) on women. The mean age of the study participants was 69 years. 3489 cases (74.3%) related to hip arthroplasty and 629 of cases (13.4%) to knee arthroplasty. 578 cases (12.3%) specified either hip or knee arthroplasty. In total, 45 PJIs were reported across all studies (0.96%). Two of the studies found either no PJI or no statistical difference in the rate of PJI when antibiotic prophylaxis was not used for catheter manipulation. Where studies report potential haematogenous spread from UTIs, this association can only be assumed. Rates of bacteriuria varied greatly between studies and depend on timing of sample and gender. Increased duration of urinary catheterisation is positively associated with UTI. Conclusion. It remains difficult to justify the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics for catheter manipulation in well patients undergoing arthroplasty. Their use is not recommended for this indication

Introduction. Two-stage reimplantation for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip is the standard of care with a 5–10% recurrence at a minimum two-year follow-up. Compiling outcomes data for this standard of care is necessary in order to characterize long-term reinfection risk and the culpable microbiology. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term success of two-stage reimplantation and identify the factors that affected the success. Methods. We performed a systematic review of randomized control trials, cohort studies, and case series through May 2019, searching Embase, Medline via PubMed, and Cochrane Library for the concept of two-stage reimplantation for the treatment of hip and knee PJIs, yielding 464 unique citations for abstract review, of which 135 were reviewed in full. Our parameters of interest included: reinfection and mortality events following successful reimplantation, the timing of these events, and the microbiology of index and recurrent infections. Results. Meeting our criteria were 59 studies with 4,494 patients (1,842 hips) who had completed reimplantation. Among successfully reimplanted hips, 4.76% (95% CI, 2.00–8.41) were reinfected by 24 months, 6.84% (4.92–9.02) were reinfected by final follow-up, 1.6% (0.32–3.52) were reinfected with an identical organism(s) with identical resistance, and 2.55% (0.77–5.03) were reinfected with a novel organism(s) or novel resistance. In 24 studies with reinfected patients and sufficient data, 8 studies reported an average interval from reimplantation to reinfection greater than 24 months, and 14 reported at least 1 patient with a reinfection event greater than 48 months following reimplantation. Conclusion. The results from this review determined that the host of an index PJI faces ongoing risk of recurrent infection years into the post-operative period despite initial eradication and that novel microbiology is the cause of a significant proportion of failures. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Background and aims. The EU-funded Back-UP project aims to develop a cloud computer platform to guide the treatment of low back and neck pain (LBNP) in first contact care and early rehabilitation. In order to identify evidence-based treatment options that can be recommended and are accessible to people with LBNP across Europe, we conducted a systematic review of recently published guidelines. Methods. Electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, HMIC, Epistemonikos, PEDro, TRIP, NICE, SIGN, WHO, Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) and DynaMed Plus were searched. We searched for guidelines published by European health professional or guideline development organisations since 2013, focusing on the primary care management of adult patients presenting with back or neck pain (including whiplash associated symptoms, radicular pain, and pregnancy-related LBP). The AGREE-II tool was used to assess the quality of guideline development and reporting. Results. Searches generated 3098 unique citations that were screened for eligibility. A total of 189 full-texts were retrieved, and 18 guidelines were included in the review (from the UK, Germany, France, Italy, Denmark, Poland, Belgium, and the Netherlands). Data extraction showed considerable variation in guideline development processes, especially regarding the methods used for identifying, appraising, and synthesising evidence, and for formulating, agreeing, and grading recommendations. Conclusions. Recommendations for the management of LBNP cover a wide range of treatment options, with self-management advice, analgesics, and exercise proposed as core treatments by most guidelines. A narrative synthesis, taking into account consistency, strength, and quality of guideline recommendations, will be presented. No conflicts of interest. Funding: This abstract presents independent research within the Back-UP project, which has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 777090. This document reflects only the views of the authors, and the European Commission is not liable for any use that may be made of its contents. The information in this document is provided “as is”, without warranty of any kind, and accept no liability for loss or damage suffered by any person using this information