Literature DB >> 35928659

A Systematic Review of Outcome Measures in Orthopaedic Trauma Trials: What Are We Measuring?

Francesc Marcano-Fernández1, Jaume Camara-Cabrera1, Kim Madden2,3, Herman Johal2, Ibrahim Mohammad Nadeem4, Raveena Kapoor2, Michael Shehata2, Carlos Prada2.   

Abstract

Purpose: The objectives of this study are to describe the outcome measures used in orthopaedic fracture care trials, with a particular focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and to determine which study characteristics are associated with number of citations.
Methods: We retrieved randomized clinical trials on fracture care between 2012 and 2017 from Embase, Medline and CENTRAL databases. Data collected included study characteristics (e.g., region, design, setting, sample size) and outcome measures (e.g., primary variable, measurement perspective, use of PROMs, study results and number of citations).
Results: We identified a total of 8,580 articles in the initial search. After title screening, abstract screening and full-text review, we included 416 articles for analysis. 58.4% (243) of the studies clearly defined a primary outcome measure and 56.3% (234) reported sample size justifications for outcome selection. The most common primary outcome reported was a visual analogue scale for pain; used in 21 of the 243 (8.6%) studies that defined a primary outcome. At least one PROM was used in 68.5% (285) of the papers included. Conclusions: A large proportion of studies reporting on PROMs for orthopaedic trauma patients do not provide key information on the outcome selection process; a step of utmost importance in and the designing and reporting of RCTs. There is substantial heterogeneity in the selection of PROMs for fracture care trials, which limits the ability to compare and summarize across studies. Future research in fracture care should strive towards improving the reporting of informative PROMs, with rationale that demonstrates understating of the injury, intervention and patient values. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-022-00667-8. © Indian Orthopaedics Association 2022.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Methodology; Outcomes; PROMs; Research

Year:  2022        PMID: 35928659      PMCID: PMC9283598          DOI: 10.1007/s43465-022-00667-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Orthop        ISSN: 0019-5413            Impact factor:   1.033


  21 in total

1.  Effect of continuous versus dichotomous outcome variables on study power when sample sizes of orthopaedic randomized trials are small.

Authors:  Mohit Bhandari; Heather Lochner; Paul Tornetta
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2001-09-11       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Assessing patient outcomes: pearls for clinical practice and research.

Authors:  Mohit Bhandari; Peter V Giannoudis
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 2.586

3.  Factors associated with citation rates in the orthopedic literature.

Authors:  Mohit Bhandari; Jason Busse; P J Devereaux; Victor M Montori; Marc Swiontkowski; Paul Tornetta Iii; Thomas A Einhorn; Vikas Khera; Emil H Schemitsch
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 2.089

4.  Measuring patient outcomes: a primer.

Authors:  Dianne Bryant; Natasha Fernandes
Journal:  Injury       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 2.586

Review 5.  Use of Patient-Related Outcomes After Orthopaedic Trauma: Helpful or Not So Much?

Authors:  William T Obremskey; Thomas F Higgins; Janet Pryu Bettger; Mark S Vrahas; Douglas W Lundy
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 6.  Current Trends in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Study of 4 Major Orthopaedic Journals.

Authors:  Matthew P Siljander; Kade S McQuivey; Adam M Fahs; Lisa A Galasso; Kevin J Serdahely; Mark S Karadsheh
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 7.  Scientific research output in orthopaedics from China and other top-ranking countries: a 10-year survey of the literature.

Authors:  Yuming Zou; Quan Li; Weidong Xu
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Worldwide orthopaedic research activity 2010-2014: Publication rates in the top 15 orthopaedic journals related to population size and gross domestic product.

Authors:  Erik Hohmann; Vaida Glatt; Kevin Tetsworth
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2017-06-18

Review 9.  Patient-Reported Outcomes in Foot and Ankle Orthopedics.

Authors:  Eric Lakey; Kenneth J Hunt
Journal:  Foot Ankle Orthop       Date:  2019-07-19

10.  Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider.

Authors:  Paula R Williamson; Douglas G Altman; Jane M Blazeby; Mike Clarke; Declan Devane; Elizabeth Gargon; Peter Tugwell
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-08-06       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.