ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Patient and healthcare professional perspectives on which potential prognostic factors for failure of total elbow replacement should be investigated.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTotal elbow replacement (TER) is an established treatment for the painful arthritic elbow; however, TER has higher failure rates than other joint replacements, such as hip and knee replacement. Understanding the prognostic factors associated with failure of TER is essential for informed decision-making between patients and clinicians, patient selection, and service planning. The aim of this study is to explore the views of patients and healthcare professionals on which potential prognostic factors should be investigated in relation to TER failure.
methodsThis evaluation comprised of two Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) workshops and a survey. PPI workshop 1 consisted of five PPI participants who helped to develop a survey assessing the importance of potential prognostic factors to investigate. The survey was shared electronically with members of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) and clinicians internationally. In PPI workshop 2, 15 PPI participants listed factors they thought important to investigate, and 12 completed the survey.
resultsPatients and healthcare professionals agreed that most factors in the survey should be investigated. Although this is not a comparative study, more of the healthcare professionals disagreed that ethnicity (49% v 33%) and VTE prophylaxis (42% v none) were important enough to be investigated, whilst more of the patients disagreed that socioeconomic status is important to be investigated (54% v 17%). Patients and healthcare professionals also suggested other factors not listed in the survey.
conclusionsPatients and healthcare professionals agreed on the importance of investigating most prognostic factors, but some factors were favoured by only one group. The results of this evaluation could help researchers decide which prognostic factors to investigate and which to routinely collect.
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.