ReviewJSAMS plus2025
Do preoperative interventions affect patient satisfaction or expectation fulfilment following total hip arthroplasty? A systematic review.
Review in JSAMS plus, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Preoperative interventions are routinely implemented for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA), but little is known about how they affect patient satisfaction. With THA numbers projected to rapidly increase, the efficacy of perioperative models of care should be explored. This systematic review aimed to investigate the impact of preoperative interventions on patient satisfaction following THA. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials, CINAHL and Sports Discus were searched from inception to May 2023. Randomised and quasi-experimental trials of interventions before THA that reported outcomes on patient satisfaction or expectation fulfilment were included. Secondary outcomes analysed were pain, function, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative complications. Meta-analysis was performed, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the quality of the body of evidence. Results: Seven studies were included. Participants who received preoperative interventions were more satisfied (SMD -0.54 [-0.87, -0.21] p = 0.001), and had better function postoperatively when compared to controls (SMD -1.86, 95%CI, -3.11, to 0.61, p = 0.004). There was no difference between groups in pain outcomes (SMD -0.37, 95 % CI -0.86, 0.12, p = 0.14), LOS (SMD -0.37, 95%CI -1.04, to 0.31, p = 0.29), or odds of postoperative complications (OR 0.91, 95%CI 0.54, 1.55, p = 0.73). All findings were supported by a very low quality body of evidence. Conclusions: Preoperative intervention was associated with better satisfaction and function in patients following THA when compared with no intervention or usual care. Preoperative intervention was found to have no effect on pain, and no effect on LOS or the odds of postoperative complications when compared with no intervention or usual care. All findings were supported by a body of evidence that was very low quality with unvalidated outcome measures and thus the true effect of the interventions is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42023429861.
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.