Observational studyEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2019
Knee arthroscopy prospective observational study of patient information.
Observational study in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient beliefs and perceptions play a crucial role in the decision-making process when managing a meniscal tear. A qualitative systematic review of the literature.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionArthroscopy is especially well suited to outpatient implementation, as procedures are less heavy for the patient. Few studies, however, have focused on patient information and understanding in arthroscopic and outpatient surgery. The aim of the present study was to perform a prospective assessment of the information received by the patient concerning outpatient arthroscopic surgery. The study hypothesis was that there is room for improvement in information. MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective descriptive observational cohort study was made of the means of information available to patients, their understanding of arthroscopic surgery and their satisfaction with the information delivered. Inclusion criteria consisted in scheduled outpatient arthroscopic surgery in whatever joint.
resultsFifty consecutive patients responded to the study questionnaire. Forty-eight (96%) considered that the surgeon had provided sufficient oral information. Twenty-nine (58%) considered that they had received sufficient written information. Forty-four (88%) reported searching on the Internet. Twelve (24%) had sought testimony and advice from someone who had undergone similar surgery. Eighteen (36%) had sought information from their community physician. Four (8%) had called back or taken a new appointment with the surgeon to get more information. Five (10%) attributed lack of information to lack of time in the preoperative consultation. Three (6%) considered the information to have been too technical for good understanding of the procedure. DISCUSSION: The present study showed that this cohort, which was relatively young compared to patients undergoing implantation, was notably autonomous in their search for information. They mainly sought information in general-public medical information websites, rather than from their community physician or specialist.
conclusionIt is important to improve patient information, and specific tools should be implemented ahead of outpatient arthroscopic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Four observational studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31123828What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.