Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24810539›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of arthroplasty2014

Patient specific instrumentation.

David R Lionberger, Catherine L Crocker, Vincent Chen

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of arthroplasty, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Cost-effectiveness of patient specificWorld journal of orthopedics · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Differences in component and limb alignment between computer-assisted and conventional surgery total knee arthroplasty.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2014
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

David R LionbergerSuite 1020, Houston, Texas.
Catherine L CrockerFoundation for Southwest Orthopedic Research, Houston, Texas.
Vincent ChenDivision of Behavioral Sciences and Division of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient specific instrumentation (PSI) has recently been developed as a replacement for traditional instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The study aim was to assess efficiency via the mean total OR time using the PSI versus computer-assisted (CAS) TKAs with accuracy as a secondary endpoint. Sixty patients were randomized to CAS or PSI. A formula was developed to derive a profit ratio (PR) that incorporated costs, revenue, and total OR time. The PSI cases were 1.45 times more profitable than CAS allowing for approximately 3 PSI cases versus 2 CAS cases in one 8 hour OR day. Results from this series show that PSI improves OR efficiency, but does not improve accuracy.

Indexed as

AdultAgedArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeHealth ExpendituresHospital CostsHumansKnee ProsthesisMiddle AgedModels, EconometricOperating RoomsOperative TimeOsteoarthritis, KneeOutcome Assessment, Health CareSurgery, Computer-AssistedTreatment OutcomeYoung Adultoperating room efficiencypatient specific instrumentationtotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.