Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34046302›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2021

Cost analysis on virtual clinic follow-up after primary joint arthroplasty.

Vinay Joseph, Mathias T Nagy, James Fountain

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 48% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. [Research progress in application of intelligent remote follow-up mode in hip and knee arthroplasty].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vinay JosephDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Wrightington Hospital, Hall Lane, Appley Bridge, Wigan, Lancashire, WN6 9EP, United Kingdom.
Mathias T NagyDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Aintree University Hospital, Lower Lane Fazakerley, Liverpool, L9 7AL, United Kingdom.
James FountainDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Aintree University Hospital, Lower Lane Fazakerley, Liverpool, L9 7AL, United Kingdom.
Aintree University Hospital · GBWrightington Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs previously reported, a virtual clinic (VC) effectively manages the increasing need to review and monitor patients after primary joint replacement. Such procedure is increasing steadily in number, with more than 200,000 procedures performed annually in the UK. Considering that face-to-face review following routine uncomplicated primary joint arthroplasty is costly and time consuming, guidelines suggest reviewing patients at regular intervals through radiographs and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).

methodsWe reviewed our VC experience in a large teaching hospital. A single surgeon established the VC, and all primary hip and knee replacements over an 18-month period (January 2016 to July 2017) were included in the study. We evaluated all clinical records, PROMs, patient satisfaction, and outcome of VC at one-year follow-up. Additionally, we conducted a safety and cost analysis.

resultsThis study included 154 primary joints (70 total knee replacements and 84 total hip replacements) in 148 patients (89 females, 59 males). The mean age at surgery was 65.3 years. Of the patients, 93% completed the postoperative PROMs, whereas <40% completed the PROM during regular clinical follow-up. All the patients had follow-up radiographs. After VC assessment, which included radiographies and PROMs, 59% of the patients were directly discharged. Of the remaining 41% patients who had face-to-face review, one-third were examined for the same arthroplasty issue, and two-thirds were examined for unrelated or other joint problems. Although the postoperative PROM was below the national average, the improvement in PROM (from pre-operative to post-operative scores) was higher than the national average. The cost analysis demonstrated an average cost savings of £10.449 per year and consultant.

conclusionsVC follow-up after primary joint replacement is a safe and cost-effective option to manage postoperative follow-up visits and identify those patients who require additional face-to-face reviews and who can be safely discharged. The discharge criteria included satisfactory improvement in PROM scores, review of follow-up radiographs, and no concerns raised by patients. Considering the increasing number of primary joint arthroplasty and the financial pressure on the National Health Service, VC offers an excellent alternative to conventional clinics.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyTotal hip replacementTotal knee replacementVirtual clinic

Identifiers

PMID34046302
PMCPMC8144681
OpenAlexW3162098348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.