ArticlePloS one2025
Outcomes after Hallux Rigidus surgery: Are we measuring what is important to patients? A qualitative analysis of patient-identified outcomes.
Article in PloS one, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHallux rigidus (HR) is the most common form of arthritis in the foot. The joint pain and loss of motion from HR experienced during walking may lead to a significant reduction in activity and quality of life, and advanced cases may require surgery. HR surgical outcomes are often evaluated quantitatively with more generic measures not designed specifically to assess HR outcomes. The goal of these study was to determine outcomes that are important to patients with HR, possibly those that are not addressed by more general foot and ankle measures.
methodsSemi-structured interviews with HR surgical patients 4-9 years after surgery were conducted. Interviews were analyzed using a team-based, iterative inductive-deductive approach to identify outcomes important to patients.
resultsTen patients were interviewed; five who received motion-sparing surgery and five with fusion surgery. From interviews, seven themes were identified: pain, first MTPJ motion, walking ability, physical activity, footwear, forefoot appearance, and pain in other areas of the body.
conclusionsPost-HR surgery patients indicated outcomes of importance that are not addressed by more general instruments. Specifically, forefoot appearance and pain in other areas of the body are not addressed by commonly used instruments. In addition, patient experiences of pain are more granular and HR-specific than the generic pain items used by other instruments. Patients facing HR surgery may benefit from outcome measures that are more specific to the HR surgical experience and include outcomes that patients share are important to them that are not included in commonly used outcome instruments.
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.