ArticleArthroplasty today2024
Reversal of the Halo Effect: Prolonged Participation in Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Negatively Impacts Revision Metrics.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model on Spending and Care Endpoints: A Systematic Review.The Journal of arthroplasty · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The downstream regional effect of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) program on care pathway-adjacent patients, including revision arthroplasty patients, is poorly understood. Prior studies have demonstrated that care pathways targeting primary total joint arthroplasty may produce a halo effect, impacting more complex patients with parallel care pathways. However, neither the effect of regional referral changes from CJR nor the durability of these positive changes with prolonged bundle participation has been assessed. Methods: Blinded data were pulled from electronic medical records. Primary analyses focused on the effect of CJR participation from 2015 (baseline) to 2020 (final participation year) at a tertiary care safety-net hospital. Patient demographics were evaluated using multivariate analysis of variance and chi-square calculations between procedure types over time. Results: Patients who underwent revision total knee arthroplasty (N = 376) and revision total hip arthroplasty (N = 482) were included. More patients moved through the revision-care pathway over the participation period, with volume increasing by 42% over time. Patients became more medically complex: the Charlson comorbidity index increased from 3.91 to 4.65 ( Conclusions: Despite care pathway improvements over 5 years of CJR participation, revision patients did not display clear benefits in quality metrics but demonstrated a considerable increase in volume and medical complexity over time. The care of these patients may supersede even thoughtfully implemented care pathways, especially when referral burden increases, as may be prone to happen in regional, financial risk-conferring value-based programs. Understanding the impact of mandatory bundled payment programs like CJR on the care of arthroplasty patients regionally will be essential as value-based programs evolve.
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.