ArticleArthroplasty today2019
Arthroplasty studies with greater than 1000 participants: analysis of follow-up methods.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ten-year functional outcomes and up to 18-year survivorship of computer-navigated total knee arthroplasty: analysis of 1677 cases from a high-volume centre.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Young or Old Age and Non-White Race Are Associated With Poor Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Response Compliance After Orthopaedic Surgery.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2023Review
- Changes Over a Decade in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Minimal Clinically Important Difference Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty.Arthroplasty today · 2023Article
- Quality of total hip arthroplasty health care based on four years of patient-reported outcomes in the Netherlands.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2023Article
- Article
- Satisfaction and Health-Related Quality of Life Following Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Surgeries in Indian Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Article
- What is the minimum response rate on patient-reported outcome measures needed to adequately evaluate total hip arthroplasties?Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Article
- An update on joint-specific outcome measures in total hip replacement.Reumatologia · 2020Review
- Standardizing Muscle Strength Measurement in Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: Response.Sports healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has become a mainstay of orthopedic joint arthroplasty research. Large studies with >1000 participants are vital to orthopedic research, as they allow for comprehensive multivariable analysis. Achieving high follow-up rates minimizes potential response bias. Maintaining adequate follow-up rates becomes more challenging as sample size increases. We aimed to systematically review the present literature to determine the follow-up rates of large cohorts/registries of total joint arthroplasty patients and to identify factors associated with successful collection of PROMs.
methodsA comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were: ≥1000 participants, ≥6 months of postoperative follow-up, and use of validated PROMs postoperatively.
resultsOf 720 abstracts screened, 21 studies met inclusion criteria. Only 2 studies reported achieving a PROM follow-up rate ≥80%, but neither collected PROMs preoperatively. The median rate of follow-up was 70%, and the median number of patients was 2970. Only 38% (8 of 21) of studies collected baseline PROMs prior to surgery.
conclusionsVery few studies in the present literature have collected validated PROMs on ≥1000 patients with ≥80% follow-up; these parameters are conducive to comprehensive multivariable analysis, while maintaining study validity and avoiding follow-up bias. Federal funding and a central coordinating site may be helpful in achieving follow-up in studies of this magnitude. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of studies with Level of Evidence I-III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.