Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39827126›Full record

Observational studyBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025

Implementation of multidisciplinary team decisions on the management of complex bone and joint infections: an observational study.

Jaap L J Hanssen, Henrica M J van der Linden, Martha T van der Beek, Robert J P van der Wal, Marco F Termaat, Mark G J de Boer, Henk Scheper

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. The impact of a multidisciplinary team on the management of fracture-related infections: A surveillance study in Brazil.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases
    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

7 authors.

Jaap L J HanssenLeiden University Center for Infectious Diseases (LUCID), Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands. j.l.j.hanssen@lumc.nl.
Henrica M J van der LindenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Martha T van der BeekDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Robert J P van der WalDepartment of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Marco F TermaatDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Mark G J de BoerLeiden University Center for Infectious Diseases (LUCID), Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Henk ScheperLeiden University Center for Infectious Diseases (LUCID), Infectious Diseases, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultidisciplinary team (MDT) management of prosthetic joint infections (PJI) and other bone and joint infections (BJI) is increasingly put into practice. However, studies evaluating the performance of MDTs in this field are scarce. We aimed to assess our MDT for complex BJI by determining the implementation rate of team decisions, analyzing factors associated with non-implementation and evaluating the clinical outcome of patients in whom MDT decisions were not implemented.

methodsAn observational study was conducted on all patients with a PJI or other BJI of which the management was discussed during MDT meetings between 2015 and 2022 in a tertiary care academic hospital. Patient characteristics and MDT data were obtained from electronic patient records. The multidisciplinary team consisted of orthopaedic surgeons, trauma surgeons, infectious diseases specialists and clinical microbiologists. A decision was considered not implemented if the patient did not receive the management that was decided by the MDT. Factors possibly associated with non-implementation were statistically analyzed using logistic regression.

resultsThe analysis included 1321 MDT decisions on 509 patients. The overall implementation rate of MDT decisions was 92%. Reasons for non-implementation were disagreement by the treating surgeon with the MDT regarding the optimal treatment (n = 24, 23%), patient preference for a different treatment (n = 19, 18%), new clinical information not yet available during the MDT meeting that made the physician change management (n = 17, 16%) or unknown (n = 45, 43%). Trauma surgeons were more likely to not implement an MDT decision (odds ratio 2.4, p = 0.01) The cure rate of patients who received a different surgical strategy than decided by the MDT was 33%. The cure rate was lower if a patient chose to deviate from the MDT decision (46%) than when the treating physician chose to deviate from the MDT decision (77%).

conclusionThe implementation rate of decisions made by our complex BJI MDT was high. Furthermore, the current study suggests that non-implementation of MDT decisions on surgical management and non-implementation initiated by the patient lead to poor clinical outcomes. An analysis of MDT decision implementation is a useful tool to evaluate the impact of MDTs and further improve its quality.

Indexed as

Arthritis, InfectiousClinical Decision-MakingPatient Care TeamProsthesis-Related InfectionsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedBone and joint infectionsMultidisciplinary careProsthetic joint infections

Identifiers

PMID39827126
PMCPMC11748583

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.