ArticleJournal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America2026
Second Chances: A Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America Survey and Review of Current Practices and Attitudes Toward the Reuse of Deep Orthopaedic Implants.
Article in Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Little has been published surrounding the safety and utility of deep implant reuse in children. Pediatric orthopaedic surgeons report reuse of deep implants in specific settings-namely during medical outreach trips outside of North America and Europe. Evaluation of existing literature demonstrates lack of clarity as to appropriate reprocessing, monitoring, and reporting practices for deep implant reuse. Methods: Existing literature was reviewed, and a Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) membership survey of 34 questions was conducted online. Results: Surveyed POSNA members indicated they reuse deep implants predominantly outside of North American centers, but many members expressed willingness to expand this practice if knowledge and infrastructure were bolstered to support it. Conclusions: The results of this literature review and survey indicate potential to expand deep implant reuse with potential benefits to health access, equity, cost, and the environment. Doing so, however, should be predicated on the results of further research and infrastructure to enable practice change and implementation safely and equitably. Key Concepts: (1)A survey of Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America members indicates widespread interest in expanding knowledge about deep implant reuse, particularly as it relates to safety and indications.(2)Deep implant reuse has the potential to reduce waste and cost while expanding access to needed implants in low-resource settings.(3)Currently, a lack of outcomes and complications data, limitations in implant-tracking programs, medicolegal constraints, manufacturer single-use designations, patient perceptions, and limited infrastructure and funding for reprocessing programs limit capacity for implant reuse across most settings.(4)Surgeons utilizing reprocessed implants should disclose this as well as how they ensure reused implant integrity and sterility with patients during informed-consent discussions.(5)Collaboration between pediatric orthopaedic surgeons across diverse geographies including low-, middle-, and high-income settings are needed to determine the optimal indications for and practices related to safety and quality assurance in deep orthopaedic implant reuse. National and international societies have a key role to play in enabling outcome sharing and knowledge on this topic. Level of Evidence: IV.
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.