ArticleBritish journal of sports medicine2020
Can even experienced orthopaedic surgeons predict who will benefit from surgery when patients present with degenerative meniscal tears? A survey of 194 orthopaedic surgeons who made 3880 predictions.
Article in British journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03462134 (Can Orthopaedic Surgeons Predict the Outcome of Treatment in Patients With Meniscal Tears? The Results of an International Survey.), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 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.
Can Orthopaedic Surgeons Predict the Outcome of Treatment in Patients With Meniscal Tears? The Results of an International Survey.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- An individualized decision between physical therapy or surgery for patients with degenerative meniscal tears cannot be based on continuous treatment selection markers: a marker-by-treatment analysis of the ESCAPE study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Trial
- In patients eligible for meniscal surgery who first receive physical therapy, multivariable prognostic models cannot predict who will eventually undergo surgery.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Trial
- Can we Predict the Outcomes of Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy?Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
- Editor's Spotlight/Take 5: Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy for a Degenerative Meniscus Tear Is Not Cost Effective Compared With Placebo Surgery: An Economic Evaluation Based on the FIDELITY Trial Data.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Article
- [Meniscus update].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Arthroscopy with partial meniscectomy for degenerative tear does not increase the risk of total knee arthroplasty at five year follow up; however, this population undergoes total knee arthroplasty with a lower threshold of osteoarthritis.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Treatment of olecranon fractures in older individuals: a cross-sectional survey of surgeon treatment preferences.JSES international · 2024Article
- Hidden Unstable Flap Should Be Suspected in Treating Intractable Pain from Medial Meniscus Horizontal Tear.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Current Controversies in Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2022Review
- Surgeons' risk perception in ASD surgery: The value of objective risk assessment on decision making and patient counselling.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022Article
- Large medial meniscus extrusion and varus are poor prognostic factors of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for degenerative medial meniscus lesions.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Article
- An increasing trend of the number of meniscus allograft transplantation in Korea.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Article
- Natural history of new horizontal meniscal tears in individuals at risk for and with mild to moderate osteoarthritis: data from osteoarthritis initiative.European radiology · 2020Article
- Can the results of a randomized controlled trial change the treatment preferences of orthopaedic surgeons?Bone & joint open · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the ability of surgeons to predict the outcome of treatment for meniscal tears by arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) and exercise therapy in middle-aged patients. DESIGN AND
settingElectronic survey. Orthopaedic surgeon survey participants were presented 20 patient profiles. These profiles were derived from a randomised clinical trial comparing APM with exercise therapy in middle-aged patients with symptomatic non-obstructive meniscal tears. From each treatment group (APM and exercise therapy), we selected five patients with the best (responders) and five patients with the worst (non-responders) knee function after treatment. 1111 orthopaedic surgeons and residents in the Netherlands and Australia were invited to participate in the survey.
interventionsFor each of the 20 patient profiles, surgeons (unaware of treatment allocation) had to choose between APM and exercise therapy as preferred treatment and subsequently had to estimate the expected change in knee function for both treatments on a 5-point Likert Scale. Finally, surgeons were asked which patient characteristics affected their treatment choice. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the surgeons' percentage correct predictions. We also compared this percentage between experienced knee surgeons and other orthopaedic surgeons, and between treatment responders and non-responders.
resultsWe received 194 (17%) complete responses for all 20 patient profiles, resulting in 3880 predictions. Overall, 50.0% (95% CI 39.6% to 60.4%) of the predictions were correct, which equals the proportion expected by chance. Experienced knee surgeons were not better in predicting outcome than other orthopaedic surgeons (50.4% vs 49.5%, respectively; p=0.29). The percentage correct predictions was lower for patient profiles of non-responders (34%; 95% CI 21.3% to 46.6%) compared with responders (66.0%; 95% CI 57.0% to 75.0%; p=0.01).In general, bucket handle tears, knee locking and failed non-operative treatment directed the surgeons' choice towards APM, while higher level of osteoarthritis, degenerative aetiology and the absence of locking complaints directed the surgeons' choice towards exercise therapy.
conclusionsSurgeons' criteria for deciding that surgery was indicated did not pass statistical examination. This was true regardless of a surgeon's experience. These results suggest that non-surgical management is appropriate as first-line therapy in middle-aged patients with symptomatic non-obstructive meniscal tears. CLINICAL
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03462134.
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.