ArticleCureus2025
Flip Lists in Elective Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Cohort Study on Efficiency and Patient Outcomes.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims This study evaluates the impact of implementing a 'flip list' approach in elective orthopaedic surgery on surgical efficiency, patient satisfaction, and resource utilisation. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted at South West London Elective Orthopaedic Centre, Epsom General Hospital, London, using prospectively collected data from a high-volume elective orthopaedic centre between August 2019 and April 2024. A total of 373 surgical lists (116 flip, 257 non-flip) involving 1,079 procedures were analysed. A total of 859 arthroplasties were analysed (523 total hip arthroplasty (THA), 326 total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and 10 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) cases). Data included patient demographics, intraoperative variables, and post-operative outcomes. Key outcomes included theatre efficiency (procedure count, duration, touch time), postoperative outcomes (length of stay, complication/readmission rates), patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)/patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), and income generated. Statistical analysis was performed using t-tests, Chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests (p < 0.05 considered significant). Results Flip lists facilitated significantly more procedures per list (3.17 vs. 2.77;
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.