ReviewDer Orthopade2020
[Challenges of fast-track arthroplasty in Germany].
Review in Der Orthopade, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Fast-track arthroplasty and patient apps].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Hospital Length of Stay and Associated Factors in Patients with Osteoarthritis from Germany: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Postoperative Inpatient Rehabilitation Does Not Increase Knee Function after Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- [Discharge readiness versus discharge-Results of the PROMISE study].Der Orthopade · 2022Article
- [Rehabilitation following total knee replacement].Der Orthopade · 2021Review
- [Intraoperative assessment of pelvic tilt and cup position in total hip arthroplasty: the relevance of navigation and robotics].Der Orthopade · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile fast-track arthroplasty has been already established in many European countries and the United States, Germany still struggles to introduce appropriate programs. This is due to a variety of reasons. REASONS: From an organizational and medical scope, the fear of alteration, the adherence to restrictions rooted in historical tradition, the reluctance to interdisciplinary cooperation, and the lack of a willingness to implement externally-guided process analysis tools, stand in the foreground. This is system related, and especially the DRG-system with the continuous devaluation of lump compensation rates in primary hip and knee arthroplasty, also in 2020, hinders the implementation. The resulting fears and concerns that an additional reduction of the length-of-stay by fast-track programs is leading to a consistent reduction of the DRG returns, are understandable. On the other hand, the disconnectedness of the ambulatory, inpatient and rehabilitation sector in Germany inhibits the introduction of fast-track programs. SOLUTIONS: A well-thought-out change-management is the basic requirement for the successfull establishment of a Fast-Track-Program. Perspectively, a rethinking towards sector-comprehensive care strategies for the implantation of a total hip or knee replacement, including the required rehabilitation procedures, has to be demanded.
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.