We explore the limitations of complete reliance on evidence-based medicine which can be diminished by confounding issues and sampling bias. Other strategies which may be reasonably invoked are discussed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:997–9

Background: The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Edition (the Journal) recently initiated a section called “Evidence-Based Orthopaedics”. Furthermore, a Levels of Evidence rating is now used in the Journal to help readers in clinical decision-making. Little is known if this recent emphasis of Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) influenced surgeons’ perceptions about and competence in evidence-based medicine. Therefore, we examined perceptions and competence in evidence-based medicine among Dutch orthopaedic surgeons. Methods: Members of the Dutch Orthopaedic Association were surveyed to examine surgeons’ attitudes towards evidence-based medicine and competence in evidence-based medicine. We evaluated perceptions using a newly developed instrument tailored to surgical practice. Univariate analysis, and a multivariable analysis using Generalized Estimating Equations were performed to model the competence instrument. Results: 367 Surgeons responded (60%). Orthopaedic surgeons welcomed evidence-based medicine. Practical evidence-based medicine resources were perceived as the best methods to move from eminence-based to evidence-based practice. Four variables were significantly and positively associated with the competence instrument:. 1) younger age, particularly age between 36 and 45 years,. 2) experience of less than 10 years,. 3) having a PhD degree, and. 4) working in an academic or teaching setting. The majority of the respondents (65%) were aware of the Journal’s evidence-based medicine section, and 20% used the Journal’s evidence-based medicine abstracts in clinical decision-making. This increased awareness in evidence-based medicine was also reflected in a frequent use of Cochrane reviews in clinical decision-making (27%). Surgeons who used the Journal’s evidence-based medicine abstracts and Cochrane reviews had significantly higher competence scores. Conclusions: Evidence-based medicine is welcomed by Dutch orthopaedic surgeons. Recent emphasis of evidence-based medicine is reflected in an increased awareness about the Journal’s evidence-based medicine section, Levels of Evidence, and the largest evidence-based medicine resource: Cochrane reviews. Younger orthopaedic surgeons had better knowledge about evidence-based medicine. Development and use of evidence-based resources as well as pre-appraised summaries like the Journal’s evidence-based medicine abstracts and Cochrane reviews were perceived as the best way to move from eminence based- to evidence-based orthopaedic practice

Introduction: Evidence-based medicine is a form of practice in which the physician accesses relevant, state-of-the-art research findings to guide the care of the individual patient (Gordon and Cameron, 2000). Therefore, evidence-based medicine should influence the decision making process when developing a treatment algorithm for early stage osteonecrosis. It was the purpose of this project to explore the literature concerning surgical options that are used currently to treat early stage osteonecrosis. Materials and Methods: Literature searches were conducted using PubMed (National Library of Medicine, USA) to identify journal articles pertaining to the treatment of pre-arthrosis osteonecrosis during the past decade. The articles were screened to include only those with greater than 5 patients and greater than two year follow-up. Results: Published reports in medical journals included: core decompression with and without nonvascular grafting (18); core decompression augmented with BMP or bone marrow cells (2); bone cement (1); vascularized graft – fibular or iliac (10); osteotomy (26); osteotomy and vascularized grafts (3); trap-door procedure (2); and hemiarthroplasty/resurfacing arthroplasty (9). There was one review of nonoperative treatment, but no clinical studies. There were only a few case reports concerning osteochondral graft/osteochondroplasty; which did not meet the inclusion criteria. Several classification systems were used: Ficat and Arlet (55%); University of Pennsylvania / Steinberg (21%); Japanese Investigational Committee (13%); Marcus (2%); Myers (3%); ARCO (5%), and other (1%). A majority of reports included follow-up of 5 years or greater (91%). Most studies (91%) were not randomized, control-matched, or prospective. Discussion: Several surgical options are available for the treatment of pre-arthrosis osteonecrosis. However, it is not possible to apply evidence-based medicine practices to the research relating to the treatment of osteonecrosis as most of the research is not controlled and not comparative. This represents a substantial void in our knowledge base concerning osteonecrosis which remains to be filled

Background. This survey was conducted to gain information about how surgeons use scientific literature and how this is influenced by their knowledge of evidence-based medicine. The results were compared to a survey conducted 10 years previously. Where appropriate, the same questions as in the 2003 survey were used. Methods. We administered a voluntary questionnaire to participants at the AO Foundation courses in Davos, Switzerland, in December 2013. We surveyed, amongst other topics, the surgeons’ levels of education in Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), how they implement EBM in daily practice and their publication record. Results. A total of 330 surgeons completed the 27 question survey. 49% (159/322) had learned about EBM in medical school. However, 69% (110/159) of those with EBM education had taken only one semester or less on the subject. 54% of participants (170/317) correctly identified a definition of EBM in surgery. This compares to 45% in the 2003 survey (130/288 respondents) of a subset who said they have previously heard of evidence-based orthopaedic surgery. When it came to applying EBM in their daily work, 45% of respondents (143/320) claim to always practice it (2003 figure: 28%, 113/404), while 26% (84/320) only use EBM for difficult or controversial cases (2003 figure: 26%, 104/404). 27% (88/323) have never published a manuscript as an author or co-author (2003 figure: 14%, 121/453), 53% (170/323) have been involved in 1–10 publications (2003 figure: 59%, 269/453), and 20% (65/323) have published more than 10 times (2003 figure: 27%, 63/453). Conclusions. While at face value there appears to be a greater understanding and utilisation of EBM among AO course participants who completed the 2013 survey compared to the 2003 study, several outcomes do not show any great variation in the intervening decade. Level of Evidence. professional survey

We wished to see if Orthopaedic Surgeons are using the current evidence with regard to the use of drains in knee arthroplasty. A questionnaire was faxed to UK members of BASK.

We had a 71. 7% response rate (160 responses out of 223). For primary TKR, 89. 5% always use a drain. 42. 1% removed their drains at between 24 and 48 hours. The commonest reason for using drains was to prevent haematoma or haemarthrosis development.

The study suggests that the majority of BASK members do not practice evidence based medicine with regard to the use of knee drains.

Aims. The principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM) are the foundation of modern medical practice. Surgeons are familiar with the commonly used statistical techniques to test hypotheses, summarize findings, and provide answers within a specified range of probability. Based on this knowledge, they are able to critically evaluate research before deciding whether or not to adopt the findings into practice. Recently, there has been an increased use of artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze information and derive findings in orthopaedic research. These techniques use a set of statistical tools that are increasingly complex and may be unfamiliar to the orthopaedic surgeon. It is unclear if this shift towards less familiar techniques is widely accepted in the orthopaedic community. This study aimed to provide an exploration of understanding and acceptance of AI use in research among orthopaedic surgeons. Methods. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were carried out on a sample of 12 orthopaedic surgeons. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes. Results. The four intersecting themes identified were: 1) validity in traditional research, 2) confusion around the definition of AI, 3) an inability to validate AI research, and 4) cautious optimism about AI research. Underpinning these themes is the notion of a validity heuristic that is strongly rooted in traditional research teaching and embedded in medical and surgical training. Conclusion. Research involving AI sometimes challenges the accepted traditional evidence-based framework. This can give rise to confusion among orthopaedic surgeons, who may be unable to confidently validate findings. In our study, the impact of this was mediated by cautious optimism based on an ingrained validity heuristic that orthopaedic surgeons develop through their medical training. Adding to this, the integration of AI into everyday life works to reduce suspicion and aid acceptance. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):696–703

Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate surgeons’ reported change of treatment preference in response to the results and conclusion from a randomized contolled trial (RCT) and to study patterns of change between subspecialties and nationalities.

Aims

The aim of this study was to examine trends in the management of fractures of the distal radius in Ireland over a ten-year period, and to determine if there were any changes in response to the English Distal Radius Acute Fracture Fixation Trial (DRAFFT).

Aims. To establish whether there was a consensus among the members of the Hip Society (HS) on the role of direct anterior approach (DAA) contemporary primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. An online survey was sent to all 112 active and senior members of the HS, to which 71 members responded. The survey was constructed to determine whether they believed that evidence-based medicine proves, in modern clinical practice, that the DAA has significant benefits compared to risks when contrasted with other approaches. In addition, they were asked if they currently used the DAA. Results. While only 16.9% (12/71) of respondents had been trained in a generic anterior approach during residency, 49.3% (35/71) had used the DAA in their clinical practice in the past or were using it at the present time. Unexpectedly, 42.9% (15/35) of respondents who had used the DAA in the past had abandoned it by the time of this survey. Only 22.5% (16/71) of all respondents believed that evidence-based medicine proves that the DAA has significant benefits compared to risks in contrast to other approaches. Conclusion. A comprehensive literature review found only three prospective randomized clinical trials (RCT) comparing the DAA with another approach with greater than one-year follow-up. Two showed minor benefits within the early postoperative period only, and one of those showed poorer mid-term results. Most of the published comparison studies with short follow-up show longer surgical times and greater blood loss for the DAA, and many three-month comparison studies show higher complication rates for the DAA using a proprietary traction table. The complications included problems with wound healing, lateral femoral cutaneous nerve injury, femoral component loosening, and femoral fractures. Because of the lack of evidence from RCTs showing superiority of the DAA over other approaches and reports of higher complications, the opinion of a large majority (77.5%; 55/71) of HS surgeons was that the DAA lacks sufficient evidence to warrant its use. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):57–61

Objectives

Evidence -based medicine (EBM) is designed to inform clinical decision-making within all medical specialties, including orthopaedic surgery. We recently published a pilot survey of the Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA) membership and demonstrated that the adoption of EBM principles is variable among Canadian orthopaedic surgeons. The objective of this study was to conduct a broader international survey of orthopaedic surgeons to identify characteristics of research studies perceived as being most influential in informing clinical decision-making.

Aims. This systematic review aimed to summarize the full range of complications reported following ankle arthroscopy and the frequency at which they occur. Methods. A computer-based search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Emcare, and ISI Web of Science. Two-stage title/abstract and full-text screening was performed independently by two reviewers. English-language original research studies reporting perioperative complications in a cohort of at least ten patients undergoing ankle arthroscopy were included. Complications were pooled across included studies in order to derive an overall complication rate. Quality assessment was performed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine levels of evidence classification. Results. A total of 150 studies describing 7,942 cases of ankle arthroscopy in 7,777 patients were included. The overall pooled complication rate was 325/7,942 (4.09%). The most common complication was neurological injury, accounting for 180/325 (55.4%) of all complications. Of these, 59 (32.7%) affected the superficial peroneal nerve. Overall, 36/180 (20%) of all nerve injuries were permanent. The overall complication rate following anterior ankle arthroscopy was 205/4,709 (4.35%) compared to a rate of 35/528 (6.6%) following posterior arthroscopy. Neurological injury occurred in 52/1,998 (2.6%) of anterior cases using distraction, compared to 59/2,711 (2.2%) in cases with no distraction. The overall rate of major complications was 16/7,942 (0.2%), with the most common major complication – deep vein thrombosis – occurring in five cases. Conclusion. This comprehensive systematic review demonstrates that ankle arthroscopy is a safe procedure with a low overall complication rate. The majority of complications are minor, with potentially life-threatening complications reported in only 0.2% of patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):239–246

The World Health Organization (WHO) launched the first Global Patient Safety Challenge in 2005 and introduced the ‘5 moments of hand hygiene’ in 2009 in an attempt to reduce the burden of health care associated infections. Many NHS trusts in England adopted this model of hand hygiene, which prompts health care workers to clean their hands at five distinct stages of caring for the patient. Our review analyses the scientific foundation for the five moments of hand hygiene and explores the evidence, as referenced by WHO, to support these recommendations. We found no strong scientific support for this regime of hand hygiene as a means of reducing health care associated infections. Consensus-based guidelines based on weak scientific foundations should be assessed carefully to prevent shifting the clinical focus from more important issues and to direct limited resources more effectively.

We recommend caution in the universal adoption of the WHO ‘5 moments of hand hygiene’ by orthopaedic surgeons and other health care workers and emphasise the need for evidence-based principles when adopting hospital guidelines aimed at promoting excellence in clinical practice.

Background. Information about low back pain (LBP) and help to support patients' self-management are recommended in the majority of guidelines for LBP management. However, the delivery of patient information and advice can be time consuming, and with short available consultation times for general practitioners (GPs), new methods to support the delivery of sufficient patient information is called for. Purpose. To identify general practitioners' perspectives on recommending online information to patients with LBP. Methods. Danish GPs varying in age and professional interests were recruited to interviewing in their practices (their working environment). The interviews were based on a semi-structured interview guide, based on a value-led method, and inspired by think aloud methods,. Results. Eight 60-Minutes interviews were conducted. For GPs to recommend online LBP information, it is essential to target the information to their patients. GPs expressed the possible advantages by involving both healthcare professionals and patients in the development of the online information material by aligning the content with the face-to-face delivered information. Furthermore, the content should be guideline concordant. However, GPs expressed that some patients had problems with accessing and understanding health-related LBP information. Conclusion. When developing online information, the content should be supported by evidence and it is important to involve patients' and GPs' preferences in the design process. Consequently, including the elements in evidence-based medicine. However, GPs do not consider online information material to be suited to all. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: Funded by ARs' Honour in Medical Research from Magda and Svend Aage Friederichs Memorial Fund and the Novo Nordic Foundation

Introduction. This analysis aims to provide an update of the Level-IV Partners Arthroplasty Registry (PAR), a quality-improvement initiative and research data repository. Methods. The Harris Joint Registry was founded in 1969 and has since expanded to become the Partners Arthroplasty Registry (PAR). Today, the PAR captures data on total hip and total knee arthroplasties conducted at seven hospitals in Massachusetts. Over time, data has been sourced through independent collection at a single hospital, retrospective sourcing through the Research Patient Data Registry (RPDR), and currently through the Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW). Various statistical methods analyzed changing trends of care provided to patients across affiliated institutions. PROMs collected in the PAR are the PROMIS Physical Function and Global Health Short Forms, the HOOS and KOOS. The registry is an associate member of ISAR and will incorporate the international implant library. Results. The PAR contains demographic, implant-specifics, and radiographic data for 45,645 primary arthroplasties and 8,400 revision surgeries from 1998 to 2018. The average recorded Charlson Comorbidity Index is 0.98. Average length of stay prior to home or care facility discharge decreased from 5.00 days in 2001 to 3.00 days in 2018. The average 30-day and 90-day mortality rates for 2018 were 0. 18% and 0.28%, respectively. Home discharge increased from 30.1% to 79.0% from 2001–2018. The values for these parameters are varied across the seven sites. Conclusion. The PAR can be used to develop best practices, analyze health-care economics, and promote evidence-based medicine. We are also developing a platform for registry development that can be exported by other hospitals that utilize an Epic-based record system. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. The direct anterior approach (DAA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) is now widely used. A recent unpublished survey of 1000 AAHKS members found that over half currently used a DAA technique and that most users felt the DAA was financially beneficial to their practice. Conversely, non-DAA users felt that their surgical volume had decreased. An online survey of Hip Society (HS) members was done to determine member's preference for a surgical approach and opinions regarding the DAA. Methods. 71 of 112 active and senior HS members (63%) responded to this 20-question survey. Results. The survey found that only 17% of respondents had trained in an anterior approach during residency, but that half (35 respondents) had used this approach in practice at one time. Subsequently, 43% of those 35 DAA users had abandoned it. The DAA learning curve was estimated at over 50 cases by 47% of respondents. Only 23% of 71 respondents answered “yes” to the statement “Do you believe that evidence-based medicine proves significant benefits over risks of the DAA THA versus other approaches?” Financial factors were common reasons for beginning to use the technique including accommodating patient requests and preventing the loss of patients to other DAA surgeons. Conclusion. 15 years after the emergence of “minimally invasive” DAA THA, a literature review finds that only one small (44 patient) clinical trial with >1-year follow-up showed small early functional benefits but with longer average surgical times and higher blood loss. If the DAA procedure has minimal benefits, is more difficult to perform with a high complication rate (LFCN injury, femoral fracture and loosening) in the hands of non-specialists and has a long learning curve (that caused a significant percentage of HS DAA users to abandon it), then financial factors must be the main reasons for its popularity. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Introduction and aims. The International Orthopaedic community is eagerly adopting Robotic Assisted Arthroplasty (RAA) technology. However, the evidence for the benefits of this technology are unproven and at best equivocal. This study is a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of all published research in the field of RAA. Methods. A systematic literature search was conducted to retrieve all peer-reviewed, English language, publications studying robot- assisted hip and knee arthroplasty between 1992 and 2017. Review articles were excluded. Articles were classified by type of study and level of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (OCEBM) Levels of Evidence System. The number of citations, authorship, year of publication, journal of publication, and country and institution of origin were also recorded for each publication. Results. We identified 73 original studies published since 1992 in the field of RAA. The procedures reported were total hip and total knee replacement, and uni-compartmental knee replacement. Publications originated from 17 countries and 117 organisations. Fifty percent of studies identified were published in the last 5 years at an average of 7 publications per year, compared to an average of 2.7 publications per year from 1992 to 2012. Thirty-six percent of original studies were of level 5 evidence or below, with a preponderance of biomechanical and cadaveric studies. The most cited paper was Bargar, Bauer and Borner's original RCT proving efficacy and safety of the Robodoc system for total hip replacement. Most publications originated in the US (36.9%) and more than 15% were published in the Journal of Arthroplasty. Conclusions. Analysis of publication patterns in robotic orthopaedic surgery allow us a unique insight into the qualities, characteristics, clinical innovations and advances in the evolution of RAA research

Aging of Population – Baby Boomers, Millennials, Generation X. Burden of TJR in USA – Estimated ∼ 4 million US adults currently live with TKR (4.2% of the population aged 50 or older) – Females (4.8%); Males (3.4%). Prevalence increased with increasing age. Estimated lifetime risk of primary TKR – 7.0% for males, 9.5% for females. Changes in Resident Education – Resident Work Hour Restrictions. Changes in Fellowship Education – Presumed shortage of fellowship trained arthroplasty surgeons, BWH Data. Changes in Healthcare Paradigm – Hospital – Margin/Mission, Efficiency, Contribution Margin, Ambulatory Centers. Academic/Community Practice – Revenue Driven, Diminished Education/Research Incentive. Arthroplasty Education – Time Restraints, Surgical Volume, Exposure to Options – CR/CS TKR, Revision TKR/THR, Femoral Cementing in THR. “Mind's EYE”. CME Training/Evidence-Based Medicine. Learn Basic Principles of Arthroplasty. “Be Neither the First nor Last to Embrace a New Technology”. “Always Act in the Best Interests of Your Patient”