Aims. Gender bias and sexual discrimination (GBSD) have been widely recognized across a range of fields and are now part of the wider social consciousness. Such conduct can occur in the medical workplace, with detrimental effects on recipients. The aim of this review was to identify the prevalence and impact of GBSD in orthopaedic surgery, and to investigate interventions countering such behaviours. Methods. A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline, EMCARE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library Database in April 2020, and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to which we adhered. Original research papers pertaining to the prevalence and impact of GBSD, or mitigating strategies, within orthopaedics were included for review. Results. Of 570 papers, 27 were eligible for inclusion. These were published between 1998 and 2020. A narrative review was performed in light of the significant heterogeneity displayed by the eligible studies. A total of 13 papers discussed the prevalence of GBSD, while 13 related to the impact of these behaviours, and six discussed mitigating strategies. GBSD was found to be common in the orthopaedic workplace, with all sources showing women to be the subjects. The impact of this includes poor workforce representation, lower salaries, and less career success, including in academia, for women in orthopaedics. Mitigating strategies in the literature are focused on providing female role models, mentors, and educational interventions. Conclusion. GBSD is common in orthopaedic surgery, with a substantial impact on sufferers. A small number of mitigating strategies have been tested but these are limited in their scope. As such, the orthopaedic community is obliged to participate in more thoughtful and proactive strategies that mitigate against GBSD, by improving female recruitment and retention within the specialty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1446–1456

This qualitative study aims to explore and highlight the experiences of trainees in the Orthopaedic Surgical Education Training (SET) program in New Zealand, with a focus on identifying gender-specific biases which may impact professional development. Orthopaedic SET trainees in New Zealand were invited to complete a qualitative, semi-structured questionnaire exploring their experiences in the Orthopaedic SET program. A broad range of topics were covered, addressing culture, belonging, learning styles and role modelling. Recurrent themes were identified using inductive methods. Analysis of questionnaire responses identified several key themes for women in the Orthopaedic SET program, compared to their male counterparts, including (1) role incredulity, (2) confidence vs. competence, (3) adaptation, (4) interdisciplinary relationships and (5) role modelling. Female participants described experiencing gender bias or discrimination by both patients and interdisciplinary colleagues at a higher rate than their male counterparts. The majority of female participants described feeling as competent as their male counterparts at the same SET level, however, identified that they do not typically exhibit the same confidence in their surgical abilities. Whilst similar numbers of female and male participants described experiencing barriers to career progression, female participants described having to adapt both physically and socially to overcome additional gender-specific barriers. Positive influences on training experience included role modelling and supportive relationships amongst trainee groups. This study highlighted gender-specific biases experienced by trainees in the Orthopaedic SET program in New Zealand. Further investigation is warranted to determine how these experiences affect professional development, and how they may be addressed to foster increased gender equity in the surgical profession. This will likely require system-level interventions to create meaningful and sustainable culture change

Aims. Early large treatment effects can arise in small studies, which lessen as more data accumulate. This study aimed to retrospectively examine whether early treatment effects occurred for two multicentre orthopaedic randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and explore biases related to this. Methods. Included RCTs were ProFHER (PROximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomisation), a two-arm study of surgery versus non-surgical treatment for proximal humerus fractures, and UK FROST (United Kingdom Frozen Shoulder Trial), a three-arm study of two surgical and one non-surgical treatment for frozen shoulder. To determine whether early treatment effects were present, the primary outcome of Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) was compared on forest plots for: the chief investigator’s (CI) site to the remaining sites, the first five sites opened to the other sites, and patients grouped in quintiles by randomization date. Potential for bias was assessed by comparing mean age and proportion of patients with indicators of poor outcome between included and excluded/non-consenting participants. Results. No bias in treatment effect was observed overall for the CI site, or the first five sites, compared with the remaining sites in either trial. An early treatment effect on the OSS was observed for the first quintile of participants recruited to ProFHER only (clinically relevant difference of seven points). Selection bias for age was observed in the ProFHER trial only, with slightly younger patients being recruited into the study. Both trials showed some selection bias for markers of poor prognosis, although these did not appear to change over time. Conclusion. No bias in treatment effects overall were found at the CI or early sites set-up. An early treatment effect was found in one of the two trials, which was likely a chance effect as this did not continue during the study. Selection bias was observed in both RCTs, however this was minimal and did not impact on outcome. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(2):96–103

For all the research into arthroplasty, provision of total knee arthroplasty (TKR) services based on gender in the Australian context is yet to be explored. International literature points toward a heavily gender biased provision of TKA services, skewed away from female patients. This research has aimed to assess the current experience of Australian female patients and to explore better assessment techniques that could provide more equitable services. A retrospective cohort analysis has been conducted using pre-op PROMs data, where available, from the Australian National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), between 7 August 2018 and 31 December 2021, including: EQ VAS Health; Oxford Knee Score; joint pain; and KOOS-12. Data was adjusted for age, ASA score, BMI, primary diagnosis, public vs private hospital, surgeon gender and years of practice (as estimated from years of registry data available). Of 1,001,231 procedures performed, 27,431 were able to be analysed (12,300 male and 15,131 female). Gender-based bias against female patients reached statistical significance across all PROM scores, according to the Kruskal-Wallis test of difference (p-value <0.0001). Males were more likely to undergo TKR than females, with odds ratios remaining statistically significant when adjusted for age, ASA score, BMI, primary diagnosis, and hospital type. Numbers were further analysed for surgeon years of recorded practice and surgeon gender with mixed results. This study found that women were less likely to undergo TKR despite worse scores on every pre-op PROM available, thus we demonstrate a statistically significant gender-based bias against female patients. More effort needs to be made to identify the base of this bias and find new ways to assess patients that can provide more equitable provision of healthcare

We recently published a paper comparing the incidence of adverse outcomes after unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty (UKA and TKA). The conclusion of this study, which was in favour of UKA, was dismissed as “biased” in a review in Bone & Joint 360. Although this study is one of the least biased comparisons of UKA and TKA, this episode highlights the biases that exist both for and against UKA. In this review, we explore the different types of bias, particularly selection, reporting and measurement. We conclude that comparisons between UKA and TKA are open to bias. These biases can be so marked, particularly in comparisons based just on national registry data, that the conclusions can be misleading. For a fair comparison, data from randomised studies or well-matched, prospective observational cohort studies, which include registry data, are required, and multiple outcome measures should be used. The data of this type that already exist suggest that if UKA is used appropriately, compared with TKA, its advantages outweigh its disadvantages. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:12–15

Māori consistently have poorer health outcomes compared to non-Māori within Aotearoa. Numerous worldwide studies demonstrate that ethnic minorities receive less analgesia for acute pain management. We aimed to compare analgesic management of a common orthopaedic injury, tibial shaft fracture, between Māori and non-Māori. A retrospective cohort study from January 1. st. , 2015, to December 31. st. 2020 inclusive. Eligible patients were 16–65 years old and had isolated closed tibial shaft fractures. 104 patients were included in the study, 48 Māori and 56 Non-Māori. Baseline demographics were similar between the 2 cohorts. The primary outcome measure was type of analgesia charted on the ward. Secondary outcome measures were pre-hospital medications given, pain scores on arrival to the emergency department (ED) and the ward, time to analgesia in ED and type of analgesia given in ED. Statistics were calculated using Fisher's exact test, Pearson's chi-squared test or Wilcoxson's rank sum test as appropriate. No statistically significant differences were found in opiates or synthetics charted to Māori vs Non-Māori (83% vs 89% and 77% vs 88% respectively), opiates given in ED, time to analgesia in ED or ED and ward arrival pain scores. Of statistical significance is that Māori were less likely to receive pre-hospital medication compared to Non-Māori (54% vs 80% respectively, p=0.004). Māori were significantly less likely to receive pre-hospital pain medication compared to Non-Māori. However no other statistically significant findings were found when comparing pain scores, time to analgesia or type of pain relief charted for Māori vs non-Māori. The reasons for Māori receiving significantly less prehospital medication were not explored in this study and further investigation is required to reduce the bias that exists in this area

Objectives. Current studies on the additional benefit of using computed tomography (CT) in order to evaluate the surgeons’ agreement on treatment plans for fracture are inconsistent. This inconsistency can be explained by a methodological phenomenon called ‘spectrum bias’, defined as the bias inherent when investigators choose a population lacking therapeutic uncertainty for evaluation. The aim of the study is to determine the influence of spectrum bias on the intra-observer agreement of treatment plans for fractures of the distal radius. Methods. Four surgeons evaluated 51 patients with displaced fractures of the distal radius at four time points: T1 and T2: conventional radiographs; T3 and T4: radiographs and additional CT scan (radiograph and CT). Choice of treatment plan (operative or non-operative) and therapeutic certainty (five-point scale: very uncertain to very certain) were rated. To determine the influence of spectrum bias, the intra-observer agreement was analysed, using Kappa statistics, for each degree of therapeutic certainty. . Results. In cases with high therapeutic certainty, intra-observer agreement based on radiograph was almost perfect (0.86 to 0.90), but decreased to moderate based on a radiograph and CT (0.47 to 0.60). In cases with high therapeutic uncertainty, intra-observer agreement was slight at best (-0.12 to 0.19), but increased to moderate based on the radiograph and CT (0.56 to 0.57). Conclusion. Spectrum bias influenced the outcome of this agreement study on treatment plans. An additional CT scan improves the intra-observer agreement on treatment plans for a fracture of the distal radius only when there is therapeutic uncertainty. Reporting and analysing intra-observer agreement based on the surgeon’s level of certainty is an appropriate method to minimise spectrum bias. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2015;4:190–194

Purpose of the study and background. Patients' beliefs about the origin of their pain and their cognitive processing of pain-related information have both been shown to be associated with poorer prognosis in low back pain (LBP), but the relationship between specific beliefs and specific cognitive processes is not known. The aim of this study was to study the relationship between diagnostic uncertainty and recall bias in two groups of chronic LBP patients, those who were certain about their diagnosis, and those who believed that their pain was due to an undiagnosed problem. Summary of the methods used and the results. Patients (N=68) endorsed and subsequently recalled pain, illness, depression and neutral stimuli. They also provided measures of pain, diagnostic status, mood and disability. Both groups exhibited a recall bias for pain stimuli, but only the group with diagnostic uncertainty additionally displayed a recall bias for illness-related stimuli. This bias remained after controlling for depression and disability. Sensitivity analyses using grouping by diagnosis/explanation received supported these findings. Higher levels of depression and disability were found in the group with diagnostic uncertainty, but levels of pain intensity did not differ between the groups. Conclusion. Although the methodology does not provide information on causality, the results provide evidence for a relationship between diagnostic uncertainty and recall bias for negative health-related stimuli in chronic LBP patients. This abstract has been submitted to a journal, but it has not been published yet. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. The study was partly funded by the Pain Relief Foundation and British College of Osteopathic Medicine; however they had no involvement in the study design, data collection, data analysis and manuscript preparation

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between recall bias for pain stimuli in chronic low back pain patients and the cost of managing their back pain in primary care. Design: A retrospective cross-sectional investigation. Method: Sixty three low back pain patients were interviewed in a primary care setting. Information was gathered on their pain intensity, disability ratings, depression, anxiety, and duration of pain. They were also presented with a surprise recall test for pain descriptors. The cost of each patient’s treatment specifically for back pain in the previous 12 months was calculated. The relationship between the cost of back pain treatment and the scores from the interview were calculated first for total cost, and then for the breakdown of individual cost items. Results: Results indicated that recall bias for pain stimuli were significantly related to total cost (Rsq. = 8%). A detailed analysis revealed that pain intensity was related to the number of appointments with the general practitioners; depression scores related to the number of appointments with the in-house osteopaths; and recall bias for pain stimuli related to referrals to external experts (outpatients). A minority of patients high on recall bias was found to account for a disproportionate amount of the cost. Conclusion: Although no causal path can be deduced from the findings, the study provides a novel approach to measuring psychological factors in back pain in reference to health care utilisation. It is limited by its retrospective design, and should be followed by prospective studies to fully understand the relationship between cognitive bias and utilisation of health services

Introduction: Clinical follow-up studies are sample based, in contrast to arthroplasty register data, which refer to the entire population treated. Aim of this study is to assess the differences in revision rate to quantify bias-factors in published literature. Materials and Methods: A structured literature review of Medline-listed peer reviewed journals concerning the STAR Total Ankle Replacement have been conducted. The published results from clinical follow up studies have been compared to Arthroplasty register Results: Results: 24% of all papers were published by the inventor of the implant. These publications show a 3,4 times lower revision rate compared to independent studies and a 4,6 times lower revision rate compared to Register based publications. The cumulative revision rate per 100 observed component years of register based publications is 1,36 times higher compared to independent clinical studies. The difference is statistically not significant. Pooling the published data from all follow up studies the impact of the studies published by the inventor leads to a statistically significant bias. Discussion and Conclusion: Publications by the inventor of the implant are overrepresented in peer reviewed scientific journals. This bias has a statistically significant impact on the final result of a Metaanalyses. Arthroplasty Register data are able to detect bias factors and lead to a better quality of assessments concerning the outcome of arthroplasty

Although patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have become increasingly important in the evaluation of spine surgery patients, interpretability may be limited by a patient's ability to recall pre-intervention impairment. The accuracy of patient recall of preoperative back pain, leg pain, and disability after spine surgery remains unknown. We sought to characterise the accuracy of patient recall of preoperative symptoms in a cohort of lumbar spine surgery patients. We analysed consecutive patients undergoing lumbar decompression or decompression and fusion for lumbar radiculopathy by a single surgeon over a four-year period. Using standardised questionnaires, we recorded back and leg numeric pain scores (NPS) and Oswestry Disability Indices (ODI) preoperatively and asked patients to recall their preoperative status at a minimum of one-year following surgery. We then statistically compared and characterised patient recall of their pre-operative status and their actual pre-operative status. Patients with incomplete follow up or diagnoses other than degenerative lumbar stenosis were excluded. Sixty-seven patients with a mean age of 66.1 years (55% female) were included in the final analysis. All cases were either posterior or combined anterior/ posterior procedures. Mean levels of surgery was 1.7 and 93.8% of all cases were instrumented. Mean duration of preoperative symptoms was 44.5 months (3.7 years). Preoperative vs postoperative PROs improved with regards to NPS back (5.2 vs 2.2, p= to 2 point difference), exceeding the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for NPS. This pattern was maintained across age, gender, and duration of preoperative symptoms. We also observed cases of symptom minimisation recall bias, and cases in which back and leg pain predominance were switched in severity during recall bias. Significant recall bias of preoperative symptoms exists in patients undergoing spine surgery, potentially limiting accurate assessment and interpretation of PROs. An understanding of PROs and their limitations is essential to assess treatment efficacy of spinal procedures

Introduction: Clinical follow-up studies are sample based, in contrast to arthroplasty register data, which refer to the entire population treated. Aim of this study is to assess the differences in revision rate to quantify bias-factors in published literature. Materials and Methods: A structured literature review of Medline-listed peer reviewed journals on examples has been performed concerning implants with sufficient material in both data sources available. Products with inferior outcome were subsumed in a subgroup. Results: The number of cases presented in peer reviewed journals are relatively low in general and show a high variability. The average revision rate in peer reviewed literature is significantly lower than in arthroplasty register data-sets. Studies published by the inventor of an implant tend to show superior outcome compared to independent publications and Arthroplasty Register data. Factors of 4 to more than 10 have been found, which has a significant impact for the results of Metaanalyses. When an implant is taken from the market or replaced by a successor there is a significant decrease in publications, which limits the detection of failure mechanisms such as PE wear or insufficient locking mechanisms. The final statement made about the product under investigation seem to follow a certain mainstream. Discussion and Conclusion: Arthroplasty Register datasets are superior to Metaanalyses of peer reviewed literature concerning revision rate and the detection of failure mechanisms. Combined reviews could reduce bias factors and thereby raise the quality of reports

Introduction: Outcome reporting following THR constitute a significant proportion of orthopaedic publications. Publication bias in the form of underreporting of studies showing non satisfactory or negative results is a well recognised problem in other specialities. We tried to find out the magnitude of this problem in orthopaedics publications dealing with THR. Method and materials: We reviewed all publications on THR in the year 2004 in three general orthopaedic journals namely JBJS (BR), JBJS (Am), CORR. Of the 1034 original articles published in these three journals more than 400 articles were concerned with total hip replacement. Results and Discussion: In this study we found only 6% of the published articles were showing non significant or negative results. This raises concerns about evidence based approach in THR and the need for preventive measures like registering all clinical trials and change in the attitude of editorial board

In recent years, there has been an increase in using self- admistrated questionnaires to accurately assess intervention outcomes in hand surgery to determine the quality of healthcare. This study aims to evaluate whether the Manchester Modified Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (M2DASH) questionnaire is a valid, reliable, responsive, and unbiased outcome measure for Carpal Tunnel syndrome compared to the Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, Boston questionnaire (BQ), and Nerve Conduction Studies (NCS). Method. 48 patients with CTS confirmed by NCS completed the M2DASH, original DASH, and the BQ, at least twice at different time intervals. The scores obtained from M2DASH were compared and correlated with the DASH, BQ, and NCS to assess validity, reliability, responsiveness, and bias of the questionnaires. Results. Validity analysis for M2DASH showed strong positive correlations with the Original DASH and BQ. No significant correlation was obtained from correlating with NCS. Reliability testing confirmed that the M2DASH is internally consistent and reproducible outcome. Significant results for responsiveness were noted in BQ symptom severity scale only. There was no age, gender, hand dominance, or side affected bias in all three questionnaires. Conclusions. The M2DASH is a valid, reliable, and unbiased outcome measure for CTS. In terms of responsiveness this study demonstrated that M2DASH & DASH is weak in detecting the clinical change for CTS, except for the BQ. Further assessment of responsiveness specifically for CTS is required in order to implement this questionnaire in clinical practice to accurately obtain results reflecting the patients progression

Previous standards for assessing the reliability of a measurement tool have lacked consistency. We reviewed the most current American Society for Testing and Materials and International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) recommendations, and propose an algorithm for orthopaedic surgeons. When assessing a measurement tool, conditions of the experimental set-up and clear formulae used to compile the results should be strictly reported. According to these recent guidelines, accuracy is a confusing word with an overly broad meaning and should therefore be abandoned. Depending on the experimental conditions, one should be referring to bias (when the study protocol involves accepted reference values), and repeatability (sr, r) or reproducibility (SR, R). In the absence of accepted reference values, only repeatability (sr, r) or reproducibility (SR, R) should be provided. Take home message: Assessing the reliability of a measurement tool involves reporting bias, repeatability and/or reproducibility depending on the defined conditions, instead of precision or accuracy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B2:166–72

Objectives. The Kaplan-Meier estimation is widely used in orthopedics to calculate the probability of revision surgery. Using data from a long-term follow-up study, we aimed to assess the amount of bias introduced by the Kaplan-Meier estimator in a competing risk setting. Methods. We describe both the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the competing risk model, and explain why the competing risk model is a more appropriate approach to estimate the probability of revision surgery when patients die in a hip revision surgery cohort. In our study, a total of 62 acetabular revisions were performed. After a mean of 25 years, no patients were lost to follow-up, 13 patients had undergone revision surgery and 33 patients died of causes unrelated to their hip. Results. The Kaplan-Meier estimator overestimates the probability of revision surgery in our example by 3%, 11%, 28%, 32% and 60% at five, ten, 15, 20 and 25 years, respectively. As the cumulative incidence of the competing event increases over time, as does the amount of bias. Conclusions. Ignoring competing risks leads to biased estimations of the probability of revision surgery. In order to guide choosing the appropriate statistical analysis in future clinical studies, we propose a flowchart

In recent years, cementless stems have dominated the North American market. There are several categories of cementless stems, but in the past 20 years, the two most popular designs in the United States have been the extensively coated cylindrical cobalt-chrome (CoCr) stem and the proximally coated tapered titanium stem, which in recent years has become the most common. The 10-year survival for both stem types has been over 95% with a distinction made on factors other than stem survival, including thigh pain, stress shielding, complications of insertion, and ease of revision. Conventional wisdom holds that proximally coated titanium stems have less stress shielding, less thigh pain, and a higher quality clinical result. Recent studies, however, including randomised clinical trials have found that the incidence of thigh pain and clinical result is essentially equivalent between the stem types, however, there is a modest advantage in terms of stress shielding for a tapered titanium stem over an extensively coated CoCr stem. One study utilizing pain drawings did establish that if a CoCr cylindrical stem was utilised, superior clinical results in terms of pain score and pain drawings were obtained with a fully coated versus a proximally coated stem. In spite of the lack of a clinically proven advantage in randomised trials, tapered titanium stems have been favored because of the occasional occurrence of substantial stress shielding, the increased clinical observation of thigh pain severe enough to warrant surgical intervention, ease of use of shorter tapered stems that involve removal of less trochanteric bone and less risk of fracture both at the trochanter and the diaphysis due to the shorter, and greater ease of insertion through more limited approaches, especially anterior approaches. When tapered stems are utilised, there may be an advantage to a more rectangular stem cross-section in patients with type C bone. In spite of the numerous clinical advantages of tapered titanium stems, there still remains a role for more extensively coated cylindrical stems in patients that have had prior surgery of the proximal femur, particularly for a hip fracture, which makes proximal fixation, ingrowth, and immediate mechanical stability difficult to assure consistently. Cement fixation should also be considered in these cases. While the marketplace and the clinical evidence strongly support routine use of tapered titanium proximally coated relatively short stems with angled rather than straight proximal lateral geometry in the vast majority of cases, there still remains a role for more extensively coated cylindrical and for specific indications.

We analysed 256 patients with primary soft-tissue sarcoma of the extremities diagnosed between 1970 and 1990 to see if tumour-related and host-related prognostic factors influenced both the selection of operation and the margin of clearance obtained at surgery. Amputation was more often performed in young patients, in those with distal tumours, and in those with deep-seated tumours. Inadequate surgical margins (those with a high risk of local recurrence) were more common in patients with deep-seated and large tumours than in patients with superficial and small tumours. These features of the tumour and the host, which have been shown to be prognostic for survival, also influenced the choice and performance of surgical procedures.

To our knowledge in medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) no study has specifically assessed the difference in outcome between matched gender groups. Previous unmatched gender studies have indicated more favourable results for women.

Orthopaedics has been left behind in the worldwide drive towards diversity and inclusion. In the UK, only 7% of orthopaedic consultants are female. There is growing evidence that diversity increases innovation as well as patient outcomes. This paper has reviewed the literature to identify some of the common issues affecting female surgeons in orthopaedics, and ways in which we can address them: there is a wealth of evidence documenting the differences in the journey of men and women towards a consultant role. We also look at lessons learned from research in the business sector and the military. The ‘Hidden Curriculum’ is out of date and needs to enter the 21st century: microaggressions in the workplace must be challenged; we need to consider more flexible training options and support trainees who wish to become pregnant; mentors, both male and female, are imperative to provide support for trainees. The world has changed, and we need to consider how we can improve diversity to stay relevant and effective.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2-10:893–899.