Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37601603›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2022

Exploring Surgeons', Nurses', and Patients' Information Seeking Behavior on Medical Innovations: The Case of 3D Printed Biodegradable Implants in Breast Reconstruction.

Stephen Whyte, Laura Bray, Ho Fai Chan, Raymond J Chan, Jeremy Hunt, Tim S Peltz, Uwe Dulleck, Dietmar W Hutmacher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 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
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

8 authors.

Stephen WhyteFrom the School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Laura BrayCentre for Behavioural Economics, Society & Technology (BEST), Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Ho Fai ChanFrom the School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Raymond J ChanCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Jeremy HuntSurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories, Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Tim S PeltzSurgical and Orthopedic Research Laboratories, Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Uwe DulleckFrom the School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Dietmar W HutmacherCentre for Behavioural Economics, Society & Technology (BEST). Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Kelvin Grove, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: To explore information seeking behavior on medical innovations. Background: While autologous and alloplastic options for breast reconstruction are well established, it is the advent of the combination of 3D printing technology and the biocompatible nature of a highly porous biodegradable implants that offers new treatment options for the future. While this type of prosthesis is not yet clinically available understanding how patients, surgeons, and nurses take up new medical innovations is of critical importance for efficient healthcare provision. Materials and Methods: Using the largest ever combined sample of breast cancer patients (n = 689), specialist surgeons (n = 53), and breast care nurses (n = 101), we explore participants preference for a new surgical treatment concept rooted in 3D printed and biodegradable implant technologies in the context of breast reconstruction. Results: We find that patients overwhelmingly favor information from a successful patient of the proposed new technology when considering transitioning. Surgeons and nurses instead favor regulatory body advice, peer-reviewed journals, and witnessing the procedure performed (either in person or online). But while 1 in 4 nurses nominated talking to a successful patient as an information source, not a single surgeon chose the same. Our multinomial logit analysis exploring patient preference (controlling for individual differences) showed statistically significant results for both the type of surgical treatment and choice to undergo reconstruction. Women who underwent a type of mastectomy procedure (compared with lumpectomy patients) were more likely to choose a former patient than a surgeon for seeking information relating to a new breast implant technology. Further, women who chose to undergo a reconstruction procedure, compared with those who did not, where more likely to prefer a surgeon for information relating to a new breast implant technology, rather than a successful patient. For medical professionals, we find no statistically significant relationship between medical professionals' preference and their age, nor the number of other medical professionals they work with daily, nor the average number of breast procedures performed in their practice on a weekly basis. Conclusions: As our findings show large variation exists (both within our patient group and compared with medical professionals) in where individuals favor information on new medical innovations, future behavioral research is warranted.

Indexed as

3D printingbiomaterialsbreast cancerbreast reconstructionnew medical technologiespreference

Identifiers

PMID37601603
PMCPMC10431284

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.