ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
What factors are important to patients when considering a revision total knee replacement in a network model of care? An exploratory qualitative analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRevision knee replacement carries significant implications for healthcare systems both clinically and financially. Rationalising revision knee replacement surgery in fewer, more experienced hospitals and their surgeons has the promise of reduced reoperation rates and lower costs. However, this may create additional logistic and financial challenges for patients. This study aimed to explore the factors important to patients in the decision-making process for revision knee replacement surgery in a regional network model of care.
methodsAn exploratory analysis was performed using semi structured interviews with 7 patients (median age 75 years: range 61 to 86) with experience of revision knee replacement either as a previous patient, family member or lay member of a research group. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and de-identified and analysed using a descriptive thematic analysis.
resultsFour themes were important in participants' accounts: importance of returning to normality; faith in surgical expertise; travel for major surgery; travel for shorter hospital visits.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that the theory of travelling further for better results is universally acknowledged by patients, but that age, mobility and dependency often place restrictions on accessibility. Utilising local services for shorter hospital visits before and after revision surgery is an attractive option for patients hoping to benefit from surgical expertise.
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.