ReviewOTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma2025
The reuse of orthopaedic devices in trauma care.
Review in OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Orthopaedic surgery relies on specialized devices to ensure effective management of musculoskeletal conditions, but escalating costs have compromised care. This has prompted patients and providers worldwide to explore alternative approaches such as reuse of devices. The benefits of reuse include economic savings, improvement in the availability of resources, and environmental conservation. There are, however, risks associated with reuse including concerns regarding mechanical integrity and sterilization. The medicolegal landscape surrounding reuse further complicates the establishment of recycling programs. Based on the literature, the reuse of external surgical devices, such as clamps and rods of external fixators, have improved access to musculoskeletal care and reduced health care expenditures without compromising outcomes. As such, these devices can be safely reused on a limited basis and with close monitoring. Although reused implantable devices may maintain some degree of mechanical integrity, the consistency of this stability and the appropriate sterilization of these products are currently unknown. Thus, the safety of implantable devices cannot be guaranteed at this time, and further research is needed. Providers interested in reuse must be aware of their national and local policies. In areas that lack formal legislation on device reuse, countries should focus on establishing national policies and laws that are tailored to their specific central processing capabilities and regulatory capacity. Alternative approaches to reuse that are able to achieve similar benefits without the risk should also be sought to improve access to care. Level of Evidence: Level V.
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.