ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2021
Examination of exclusion criteria in total knee arthroplasty rehabilitation trials: influence on the application of evidence in day-to-day practice.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing "people-like-me" and linear mixed model predictions of functional recovery following knee arthroplasty.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2022Article
- Pre- and Post-Operative Rehabilitation Interventions in Patients at Risk of Poor Outcomes Following Knee or Hip Arthroplasty: Protocol for Two Systematic Reviews.Advances in rehabilitation science and practiceArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) rehabilitation trials use exclusion criteria, which may limit their generalizability in practice. We investigated whether patients seen in routine practice who meet common exclusion criteria recover differently from TKA compared to research-eligible patients. We hypothesized that research-ineligible patients would demonstrate poorer average postoperative function and slower rate of functional recovery compared to research-eligible patients.
methodsPatient characteristics and exclusion criteria were extracted and summarized from trials included in the three most recent systematic reviews of TKA rehabilitation. Trial participant characteristics were compared to a clinical dataset of patient outcomes collected in routine TKA rehabilitation. Where possible, individual exclusion criterion from the trials were applied to the clinical dataset to determine "eligible" and "ineligible" groups for research participation. Postoperative functional outcomes including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Timed Up and Go (TUG) were compared between "eligible" and "ineligible" groups using mixed effects models.
results2,528 participants from 27 trials were compared to 474 patients from the clinical dataset. Research participants were older, with lower Body Mass Index than patients in the clinical dataset. Many patients in the clinical dataset would be "ineligible" for research participation based upon common exclusion criteria from the trials. Differences were observed in average postoperative functioning between some "eligible" and "ineligible" groups in the clinical dataset. However, no differences were observed in functional recovery rate between groups, except for patients with diabetes whose TUG recovered more slowly than their "eligible" counterparts.
conclusionsMany patients in the clinical dataset were "ineligible" for research participation based upon common TKA rehabilitation trial exclusion criteria. However, the postoperative recovery rate did not differ between "eligible" and "ineligible" groups based on individual exclusion criterion-except for individuals with diabetes. This suggests that both clinical and research populations may recover similarly from TKA.
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.