Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8666600›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume1996

Differences between patients' and physicians' evaluations of outcome after total hip arthroplasty.

J R Lieberman, F Dorey, P Shekelle, L Schumacher, B J Thomas, D J Kilgus, G A Finerman

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

67 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Patients' expectations of shoulder instability repair.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

J R LiebermanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center 90095, USA.
F Dorey
P Shekelle
L Schumacher
B J Thomas
D J Kilgus
G A Finerman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare patients' and physicians' evaluations of the results of 147 total hip arthroplasties. The patients and physicians independently evaluated pain and over-all satisfaction with the outcome of the procedure using a 10.0-centimeter visual-analog scale. They also answered a questionnaire with which they assessed general health, functional ability, and pain. The mean (and standard deviation) analog rating for pain (with 0.0 centimeters indicating no pain and 10.0 centimeters, severe pain) was 1.7 +/- 2.6 centimeters as assessed by the patients and 1.1 +/- 1.8 centimeters as assessed by the physicians (p < 0.001, paired t test). The mean analog rating for over-all satisfaction (with 0.0 centimeters indicating poor and 10.0 centimeters, excellent) was 8.6 +/- 2.1 centimeters as assessed by the patients and 8.8 +/- 1.7 centimeters as assessed by the physicians (p = 0.07, paired t test). There was a marked disparity between the patients' and the physicians' scores when the patients assigned a low score to a particular area. For the thirty patients who rated the pain as more than 4.0 centimeters, the mean analog rating was 6.8 +/- 2.1 centimeters according to the patients, while it was 3.6 +/- 2.7 centimeters according to the physicians (p < 0.001, linear regression). The mean analog rating for over-all satisfaction according to the nineteen patients who rated this parameter as less than 7.0 centimeters was 3.8 +/- 2.0 centimeters, while the mean rating according to the physicians 6.5 +/- 2.8 centimeters (p < 0.001, linear regression). The patients' and physicians' evaluations were similar regarding the results of the total hip arthroplasty when the patients had little or no pain and were satisfied with the result. However, the disparity increased as the patients' ratings for pain increased and their ratings for over-all satisfaction decreased. This study highlights a discrepancy between patients' and physicians' evaluations of the results of total hip arthroplasty. This discrepancy increased when the patient was not satisfied with the outcome. The use of patients' self-administered questionnaires as well as traditional physician-generated assessments may provide a more complete evaluation of the results of total hip arthroplasty.

Indexed as

Hip ProsthesisActivities of Daily LivingAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAttitude of Health PersonnelExerciseFemaleHealth StatusHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPatient SatisfactionPhysicians

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.