Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32341795›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2020

Integrated care programmes for sport and work participation, performance of physical activities and quality of life among orthopaedic surgery patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Pieter Coenen, Gerben Hulsegge, Joost G Daams, Rutger C van Geenen, Gino M Kerkhoffs, Maurits W van Tulder, Judith A Huirne, Johannes R Anema, P Paul Kuijer

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Pieter CoenenAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4034-7063
Gerben HulseggeAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Joost G DaamsAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam Movement Sciences research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rutger C van GeenenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Foundation FORCE (Foundation for Orthopaedic Research Care and Education), Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands.
Gino M KerkhoffsAmsterdam UMC, Academic Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maurits W van TulderDepartment of Health Sciences, Amsterdam Movement Sciences research institute, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Judith A HuirneDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Johannes R AnemaAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
P Paul KuijerAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Amsterdam Movement Sciences research institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOrthopaedic surgery is primarily aimed at improving function and pain reduction. Additional integrated care may enhance patient's participation in sports and work, possibly improving performance of physical activities and quality of life (QoL). We aimed to assess the effectiveness of integrated care among orthopaedic surgery patients.

designSystematic review with meta-analysis. DATA SOURCE: Medline, EMBASE and CINAHL (until 17 June 2019). ELIGIBILITY FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We searched for controlled studies on integrated care interventions consisting of active referral to case managers, rehabilitation with participation-based goals and/or e/mHealth, with outcomes of sports and work participation, performance of physical activities and/or QoL. Outcomes were normalised to 0-100 scales and statistically pooled.

resultsSeventeen articles (n=2494) of moderate quality were included reporting on patients receiving back, upper limb, knee or hip surgery. Only one study reported on return to sports and found no significant benefit. For return to work, one study did (90% vs 82%) and one did not (relative risk=1.18 (0.80 to 1.70)) observe significant benefits. Integrated care showed small effects for improving performance of physical activities (2.69 (-0.20 to 5.58); eight studies, n=1267) and QoL (2.62 (1.16 to 5.05); nine studies, n=1158) compared with usual care. SUMMARY/

conclusionWe found insufficient and inconsistent evidence for the effectiveness of integrated care for orthopaedic surgery patients regarding sport and work participation. Small effects were found for performance of physical activities and QoL. High quality research on integrated care focusing on sports and work participation is needed before integrated care can be implemented for orthopaedic surgery patients.

Indexed as

interventionmeta-analysisorthopaedicssport

Identifiers

PMID32341795
PMCPMC7173989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.