Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32206672›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2020

Returning to Work After Articular Cartilage Repair Intervention: A Systematic Review.

Puwapong Nimkingratana, Mats Brittberg

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Puwapong NimkingratanaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Mats BrittbergCartilage Research Unit, University of Gothenburg, Region Halland Orthopaedics, Kungsbacka Hospital, Kungsbacka, Sweden.
Hallands sjukhus Kungsbacka · SEUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe process of returning to work after cartilage treatment has not been studied in depth, even though a better understanding of potential outcomes could lead to significant benefits for the general population. PURPOSE: To determine which surgical interventions are most effective in helping patients return to work after cartilage repair and to identify factors that affect the ability to return to work. STUDY

designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

methodsThis systematic review followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines in analyzing reports on articular cartilage treatment and return to work published from January 1966 (when the first system of classifying articular cartilage injuries based on the mechanism of injuries and type of lesions was developed) to January 2019. General surgical information and available clinical scores were used to assess outcomes.

resultsOnly 5 studies describing 283 patients were found to be relevant to our objectives and were therefore included in the analysis. Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) and osteochondral allografts were the only 2 procedures for which information was included regarding patient return to work rates. The mean (overall) return-to-work time after a cartilage repair operation was 4.80 ± 3.02 months. ACI was the most common procedure (3 studies; 227 patients). Return to work after ACI or ACI with high tibial osteotomy (HTO) occurred in almost 100% of cases, whereas the rate of return to work was 51.78% for patients who underwent osteochondral allograft (

conclusionThe vast majority of published results on articular cartilage repair do not include data on return to work. Although available data on articular cartilage repair in the general population reveal a high rate of return to work, including those patients treated with ACI, the data do not stratify patients by the type and demand of work. No randomized studies have examined return-to-work rates. Hence, authors should include these data in future studies. A refined definition of work intensity, rather than just return to work, may provide a clearer picture of the relative effectiveness of different surgical interventions. To that end, the authors propose a return to work prognostic score called the Prognostic Cartilage Repair Return to Work Score, or PROCART-RTW score.

Indexed as

allograftautologous chondrocyte implantationcartilagehigh tibial osteotomyinjuryPROCART-RTW scorerepairreturn to work

Identifiers

PMID32206672
PMCPMC7074519
OpenAlexW3010842138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.