Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38988175›Full record

ArticleClinics in shoulder and elbow2024

Experiences and outcomes in shoulder replacements in a district general hospital over 19 years.

Andrew Peter Dekker, Jamie Hind, Neil Ashwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics in shoulder and elbow, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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.

Andrew Peter DekkerDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Queen's Hospital Burton, Burton on Trent, UK.
Jamie HindDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Queen's Hospital Burton, Burton on Trent, UK.
Neil AshwoodDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Queen's Hospital Burton, Burton on Trent, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the changing experiences of shoulder surgeons working in a district general hospital.

methodsA consecutive series of 395 shoulders (225 male, 170 female) over a 19-year period (2000-2019) with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were analyzed. Outcome measures were length of stay, operating time, satisfaction visual analog score (VAS), pain VAS, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Constant-Murley score, range of movement, complications, and implant survival.

resultsThe incidence of a diagnosis of osteoarthritis as the surgical indication increased over time. The number of cases by surgeon per year increased from three cases in 2,000 to a peak of 33 in 2011. Up to seven implant manufacturers were used. The incidence of hemiarthroplasties decreased, and more numerous reverse polarity and anatomic arthroplasties were performed (P<0.001). More glenoid and humeral components were cemented and more short-stem implants were used in later years (P<0.001). Length of stay was a median of 1 day with a trend towards daytime surgery in recent years. Patients were satisfied (VAS 8/10) and OSS improved by 8 points on average throughout the observation period.

conclusionsDespite frequent introductions of new implants, patient outcome, satisfaction, and complication rates remained good. There appears to be a need for large-scale, generalizable studies to understand why technological advancements leading to changes in implants do not influence clinical outcomes. Level of evidence: III.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyDistrictHospitalsShoulder

Identifiers

PMID38988175
PMCPMC11393443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.