Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the highest level of evidence used to inform patient care. However, it has been suggested that the quality of randomization in RCTs in orthopaedic surgery may be low. This study aims to describe the quality of randomization in trials included in systematic reviews in orthopaedic surgery. Systematic reviews of RCTs testing orthopaedic procedures published in 2022 were extracted from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A random sample of 100 systematic reviews was selected, and all included RCTs were retrieved. To be eligible for inclusion, systematic reviews must have tested an orthopaedic procedure as the primary intervention, included at least one study identified as a RCT, been published in 2022 in English, and included human clinical trials. The Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 Tool was used to assess random sequence generation as ‘adequate’, ‘inadequate’, or ‘no information’; we then calculated the proportion of trials in each category. We also collected data to test the association between these categories and characteristics of the RCTs and systematic reviews.Aims
Methods
The evidence base within trauma and orthopaedics has traditionally favoured quantitative research methodologies. Qualitative research can provide unique insights which illuminate patient experiences and perceptions of care. Qualitative methods reveal the subjective narratives of patients that are not captured by quantitative data, providing a more comprehensive understanding of patient-centred care. The aim of this study is to quantify the level of qualitative research within the orthopaedic literature. A bibliometric search of journals’ online archives and multiple databases was undertaken in March 2024, to identify articles using qualitative research methods in the top 12 trauma and orthopaedic journals based on the 2023 impact factor and SCImago rating. The bibliometric search was conducted and reported in accordance with the preliminary guideline for reporting bibliometric reviews of the biomedical literature (BIBLIO).Aims
Methods
Our primary aim was to establish the proportion of female orthopaedic consultants who perform arthroplasty via cases submitted to the National Joint Registry (NJR), which covers England, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, and Guernsey. Secondary aims included comparing time since specialist registration, private practice participation, and number of hospitals worked in between male and female surgeons. Publicly available data from the NJR was extracted on the types of arthroplasty performed by each surgeon, and the number of procedures of each type undertaken. Each surgeon was cross-referenced with the General Medical Council (GMC) website, using GMC number to extract surgeon demographic data. These included sex, region of practice, and dates of full and specialist registration.Aims
Methods
COVID-19-related patient care delays have resulted in an unprecedented patient care backlog in the field of orthopaedics. The objective of this study is to examine orthopaedic provider preferences regarding the patient care backlog and financial recovery initiatives in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. An orthopaedic research consortium at a multi-hospital tertiary care academic medical system developed a three-part survey examining provider perspectives on strategies to expand orthopaedic patient care and financial recovery. Section 1 asked for preferences regarding extending clinic hours, section 2 assessed surgeon opinions on expanding surgical opportunities, and section 3 questioned preferred strategies for departmental financial recovery. The survey was sent to the institution’s surgical and nonoperative orthopaedic providers.Aims
Methods
To describe the incidence of adverse clinical outcomes related to COVID-19 infection following corticosteroid injections (CSI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. To describe the incidence of positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing, positive SARS-COV2 IgG antibody testing or positive imaging findings following CSI at our institution during the COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective observational study was undertaken of consecutive patients who had CSI in our local hospitals between 1 February and 30June 2020. Electronic patient medical records (EPR) and radiology information system (RIS) database were reviewed. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing, SARS-COV2 IgG antibody testing, radiological investigations, patient management, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Lung findings were categorized according to the British Society of Thoracic Imaging (BSTI) guidelines. Reference was made to the incidence of lab-confirmed COVID-19 cases in our region.Aims
Methods
Plots are an elegant and effective way to represent
data. At their best they encourage the reader and promote comprehension.
A graphical representation can give a far more intuitive feel to
the pattern of results in the study than a list of numerical data,
or the result of a statistical calculation. The temptation to exaggerate differences or relationships between
variables by using broken axes, overlaid axes, or inconsistent scaling
between plots should be avoided. A plot should be self-explanatory and not complicated. It should
make good use of the available space. The axes should be scaled
appropriately and labelled with an appropriate dimension. Plots are recognised statistical methods of presenting data and
usually require specialised statistical software to create them.
The statistical analysis and methods to generate the plots are as
important as the methodology of the study itself. The software,
including dates and version numbers, as well as statistical tests
should be appropriately referenced. Following some of the guidance provided in this article will
enhance a manuscript. Cite this article:
This paper offers a summary of the ethical guide
for the European orthopaedic community; the full report will be
published in the EFORT Journal. Cite this article:
In May 2012, in airports across the globe, seven
orthopaedic surgeons bravely said goodbye to their loved ones, and
slowly turned towards their respective aircraft. Filled with expectation
and mild trepidation they stepped into the unknown… the ABC fellowship
of 2012.
Using inaccurate quotations can propagate misleading
information, which might affect the management of patients. The
aim of this study was to determine the predictors of quotation inaccuracy
in the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid.
We randomly selected 100 papers from ten orthopaedic journals. All references
were retrieved in full text when available or otherwise excluded.
Two observers independently rated all quotations from the selected
papers by comparing the claims made by the authors with the data
and expressed opinions of the reference source. A statistical analysis
determined which article-related factors were predictors of quotation
inaccuracy. The mean total inaccuracy rate of the 3840 verified
quotes was 7.6%. There was no correlation between the rate of inaccuracy
and the impact factor of the journal. Multivariable analysis identified
the journal and the type of study (clinical, biomechanical, methodological,
case report or review) as important predictors of the total quotation
inaccuracy rate. We concluded that inaccurate quotations in the peer-reviewed
orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid were common and slightly
more so for certain journals and certain study types. Authors, reviewers
and
Duplicate publication in orthopaedic journals may further an author’s academic career but this is at the cost of both scientific integrity and knowledge. Multiple publications of the same work increase the workload of
