ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
Treatment decision-making process after an anterior cruciate ligament injury: patients', orthopaedic surgeons' and physiotherapists' perspectives.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Reported Knee Function and Return-to-Sport Rates After Nonsurgical and Surgical Treatment of an Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Results From the NACOX Prospective Cohort Study.The American journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- From Past to Future: Emergent Concepts of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Surgery and Rehabilitation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- What does collaborative healthcare for people with musculoskeletal-related conditions look like? A scoping review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Treatment Decision-Making for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture From the Perspective of Physical Therapists in Australia: A Mixed Methods Study.Physical therapy · 2025Article
- More knee reinjuries after ACL reconstruction compared to nonsurgical treatment of the ACL. A 2-year follow-up of the NACOX prospective cohort study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- Clinical, Functional, Sports Participation, and Osteoarthritis Outcomes After ACL Injury: Ten-Year Follow-up Study of the Delaware-Oslo ACL Cohort Treatment Algorithm.The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume · 2025Article
- Which patients need anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction after initial treatment with rehabilitation? A scoping review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- Assessment of Quality and Readability of Information Provided by ChatGPT in Relation to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- The impact of a patient decision aid on treatment choices after anterior cruciate ligament injuries.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2023Article
- The experience and influence of fear after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an interview study with young athletes.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the treatment decision-making process after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury from patients', orthopaedic surgeons' and physiotherapists' perspectives.
methodsThe study is a part of the NACOX study, which is designed to describe the natural corollaries after ACL injury. For the present study, a subgroup 101 patients were included. Patients, their orthopaedic surgeons and their physiotherapists, answered a Shared Decision-Making Process (SDMP) questionnaire, when treatment decision for ACL reconstruction surgery (ACLR) or non-reconstruction (non-ACLR) was taken. The SDMP questionnaire covers four topics: " informed patient", " to be heard", " involvement" and " agreement".
resultsMost (75-98%) patients considered their needs met in terms of being heard and agreement with the treatment decision. However, fewer in the non-ACLR group compared to the ACLR group reported satisfaction with information from the orthopaedic surgeon (67% and 79%), or for their own involvement in the treatment decision process (67% and 97%). CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Most patients and caregivers considered that patients' needs to be informed, heard and involved, and to agree with the decision about the treatment process, were fulfilled to a high extent. However, patients where a non-ACLR decision was taken experienced being involved in the treatment decision to a lower extent. This implies that the non-ACLR treatment decision process needs further clarification, especially from the patient involvement perspective.
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.