Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35542179›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2022

Orthopaedic surgeons' perspective on the implementation of outpatient hip and knee arthroplasty - Results of a nationwide survey.

Mark H F Keulen, Jasper Most, Martijn G M Schotanus, Emil H van Haaren, Ide C Heyligers, Bert Boonen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mark H F KeulenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center Heerlen and Sittard-Geleen, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6162, BG Geleen, the Netherlands.
Jasper MostDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center Heerlen and Sittard-Geleen, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6162, BG Geleen, the Netherlands.
Martijn G M SchotanusDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center Heerlen and Sittard-Geleen, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6162, BG Geleen, the Netherlands.
Emil H van HaarenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center Heerlen and Sittard-Geleen, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6162, BG Geleen, the Netherlands.
Ide C HeyligersDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center Heerlen and Sittard-Geleen, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6162, BG Geleen, the Netherlands.
Bert BoonenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Zuyderland Medical Center Heerlen and Sittard-Geleen, Dr. H. van der Hoffplein 1, 6162, BG Geleen, the Netherlands.
Zuyderland Medisch Centrum · NLMaastricht University · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Outpatient joint arthroplasty (OJA) for the hip and knee is gaining popularity among orthopaedic surgeons worldwide. The purposes of this study were to (1) assess the proportion of Dutch orthopaedic surgeons who perform OJA; (2) identify surgeons' willingness to implement OJA in the future; (3) identify reasons and barriers to implement OJA; and (4) gather surgeon's perspective on the implementation of OJA. Methods: A 20-item survey was developed and administered by email to orthopaedic surgeons who are a member of the Dutch Hip Society and Dutch Knee Society. Survey response rate was 40% (N = 123). Results: Twenty-two respondents (18%) already implemented OJA, and 46% of respondents (who don't perform OJA) were interested to implement OJA in the future. Reasons to perform OJA included own positive experiences (82%), available evidence (77%) and patients' request (77%). Proponents' and opponents' view on safety and added value conflicted with each other. Other barriers included patient selection and organizational related (e.g., multidisciplinary support). Surgeons' view on evolution and relevance of OJA significantly differed by respondents who perform OJA versus respondents who don't perform OJA. Most respondents agreed with one another that the healthcare institution benefits most from OJA, and that optimization of the arthroplasty pathway could be reached through better patient education and -participation (e.g., eHealth, wearables). Conclusion: One in five respondents currently implement OJA pathways, and about half of the remaining respondents are interested to implement OJA in the future. OJA-opponents aren't convinced of the value and safety of OJA, despite accumulating evidence supporting OJA. Future research should inform patient-selection and -acceptance and organizational implementation.

Indexed as

OutpatientOutpatient arthroplastySame-day dischargeSurgeon perspectiveSurveyTotal hip arthroplastyTotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID35542179
PMCPMC9079766
OpenAlexW4224257190

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.