ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2025
Quality of primary total knee arthroplasty operative reports in a tertiary teaching hospital.
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOperative reports (OP-Rs) are essential for communication among healthcare providers. They require accuracy and completeness to serve as a quality indicator of patient care. Objective assessment of primary total knee replacement (TKR) OP-Rs has never been reported. Therefore, a standardized benchmark for assessment and factors affecting the completeness of TKR OP-Rs needs to be evaluated.
aimTo evaluate the completeness rate of primary TKR OP-Rs in a teaching hospital and to assess the factors affecting completeness.
methodsA retrospective review of 58 consecutive primary TKR OP-Rs in a tertiary teaching hospital were included in this study. We used document analysis to review the OP-Rs against a standardized list of six subsets of mandatory variables. The correlation between the percentage of completeness and the specific variables was determined.
resultsAfter analyzing 58 cases, we found that the time to documentation was 1.5 hours. Out of the 52 mandatory variables, a median of 30 variables were documented yielding a completeness of 58%. Administrative, procedural, exposure, and implant variables were documented the most often, whereas clinical and process variables were most frequently left uncompleted. The documentation of the operative maneuver was variable. There was no association between the completeness of the reports and the time to documentation, documenter level, complication rate, operative duration, or length of hospital stay.
conclusionMultiple variables were left undocumented on the unstructured primary TKR OP-Rs. The completeness percentage will likely improve after the implementation of a standardized structured OP-R.
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.