CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: There is no systematic assessment of the quality of scientific production in the specialty of hand surgery in our setting. This study aimed to systematically assess the status of evidence generation relating to hand surgery and to evaluate the reproducibility of the classification method based on an evidence pyramid. DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary study conducted at Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp) and Faculdade Estadual de Medicina de Marília (Famema). METHODS: Two researchers independently conducted an electronic database search for hand surgery studies published between 2000 and 2009 in the two main Brazilian orthopedic journals (Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia). The studies identified were subsequently classified according to methodological design (systematic review of the literature, randomized clinical trial, cohort study, case-control study, case series and other studies) and evidence level (I to V). RESULTS: A total of 1,150 articles were evaluated, and 83 (7.2%) were included in the final analysis. Studies with evidence level IV (case series) accounted for 41 (49%) of the published papers. Studies with evidence level V (other studies) accounted for 12 (14.5%) of the papers. Only two studies (2.4%) were ranked as level I or II. The inter-rater reproducibility was excellent (k = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Hand surgery articles corresponded to less than one tenth of Brazilian orthopedic production. Studies with evidence level IV were the commonest type. The reproducibility of the classification stratified by evidence level was almost perfect.
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: There is no systematic assessment of the quality of scientific production in the specialty of hand surgery in our setting. This study aimed to systematically assess the status of evidence generation relating to hand surgery and to evaluate the reproducibility of the classification method based on an evidence pyramid. DESIGN AND SETTING: Secondary study conducted at Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp) and Faculdade Estadual de Medicina de Marília (Famema). METHODS: Two researchers independently conducted an electronic database search for hand surgery studies published between 2000 and 2009 in the two main Brazilian orthopedic journals (Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia). The studies identified were subsequently classified according to methodological design (systematic review of the literature, randomized clinical trial, cohort study, case-control study, case series and other studies) and evidence level (I to V). RESULTS: A total of 1,150 articles were evaluated, and 83 (7.2%) were included in the final analysis. Studies with evidence level IV (case series) accounted for 41 (49%) of the published papers. Studies with evidence level V (other studies) accounted for 12 (14.5%) of the papers. Only two studies (2.4%) were ranked as level I or II. The inter-rater reproducibility was excellent (k = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Hand surgery articles corresponded to less than one tenth of Brazilian orthopedic production. Studies with evidence level IV were the commonest type. The reproducibility of the classification stratified by evidence level was almost perfect.
Authors: Fernando Travaglini Penteado; João Baptista Gomes Dos Santos; Fábio Augusto Caporrino; Vinícius Ynoe de Moraes; João Carlos Belloti; Flávio Faloppa Journal: J Hand Microsurg Date: 2012-04-14
Authors: Vinícius Ynoe de Moraes; Paula Martins de Oliveira Ferrari; Guilherme Conforto Gracitelli; Flávio Faloppa; João Carlos Belloti Journal: Acta Ortop Bras Date: 2014 Impact factor: 0.513
Authors: Walter Yoshinori Fukushima; Vinícius Ynoe de Moraes; Fernado Travaglini Penteado; Flávio Faloppa; João Baptista Gomes Dos Santos Journal: SICOT J Date: 2015-09-22
Authors: Vinícius Ynoe DE Moraes; Priscila Frantz Ruff; Carlos Henrique Fernandes; João Baptista Gomes Dos Santos; João Carlos Belloti; Flávio Faloppa Journal: Acta Ortop Bras Date: 2018 May-Jun Impact factor: 0.513