An international survey to identify the intrinsic and extrinsic factors of research studies most likely to change orthopaedic practice

Thornley, Patrick; de, Darren; Evaniew, Nathan; Farrokhyar, Forough; Bhandari, Mohit; Ghert, Michelle

doi:10.1302/2046-3758.54.2000578

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As part of a skin closure trial, we believe that randomisation is essential to influence surgeons in changing their practice. This has also been shown previously with 94% of surgeons stating that randomisation is essential in the design of a trial that would change their current practice …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…This has also been shown previously with 94% of surgeons stating that randomisation is essential in the design of a trial that would change their current practice. 4 In a 3-armed trial comparing clips, subcuticular sutures and barbed sutures for skin closure in 278 hip and knee arthroplasty surgeries found that skin wounds closed using sutures were significantly more likely to have complications than staples (P = .033). 5 There was also a significant difference in complications between staples and barbed sutures (P = .017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Skin closure in arthroplasty surgery: Current practice

Barrow

Divecha

Board

2018

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study by Smith et al. (2010) concluded that clips are associated with 3 times the infection rate compared with subcuticular sutures in orthopaedic surgery (P = .01).For hip surgery, there was a 4-fold increase. We aimed to determine the trends and influences in skin closure and wound care for hip and knee arthroplasty in the northwest region as well as what would change surgeons' current practice. A short online survey was emailed to consultants in the northwest of England enquiring about their current practice in superficial skin closure, what has influenced this, and finally what would change their practice. Returned surveys were then analysed. A total of 45 consultants responded (response rate of 40.2%). In both hip and knee arthroplasty, clips were the most commonly used superficial skin closure material (53% and 63%, respectively). Personal experience was the greatest influence on the choice of closure material in both hip and knees (84% and 93% respectively). A total of 66% of hip and 76% of knee surgeons would change their closure material if there was evidence to support this. Hip and knee arthroplasty surgeons are influenced by their personal experience, and most use clips as their skin closure method. Most would change their practice with evidence of one material over another. We conclude that there is need for a prospective, well-powered, multi-centre randomised control trial to determine the skin closure material that has the lowest return-to-theatre rate in arthroplasty surgery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skin closure in arthroplasty surgery: Current practice

Barrow

Divecha

Board

2018

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 3 4 5 Medical journals also use the same measures to define their impact in an attempt to attract a greater number of high-quality authors. 3 , 6 , 7 For academic orthopaedic departments, publication productivity is extremely important when attracting high-quality researchers and extramural funding. 8 Stavrakis et al 8 have shown that departmental productivity was closely correlated with leadership productivity and funding.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthopaedic Academic Activity in the United States: Bibliometric Analysis of Publications by City and State

Hohmann¹,

Glatt

Tetsworth

2018

JAAOS Glob Res Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The purpose of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis of orthopaedic academic output in the United States.Methods:Publications based on city and state origin, corrected for population size, median household income, total number of surgeons, and the number of various subspecialties were evaluated. The 15 highest-ranked orthopaedic journals were audited from 2010 to 2014 and then subdivided into anatomic regions and 14 subspecialties.Results:A total of 8,100 articles were published during the study period. Most originated from New York, California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Minnesota. New York published the greatest number by city, followed by Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, and Rochester. When adjusted for the number of publications per city, surgeons per population, publications per surgeon population, publications per population, and publications per median income per capita, Vail and New York led in two and Stanford in one of the metrics.Conclusions:New York was the leader for the total publications, greatest activity within subspecialties, and publications per surgeon/population and per median income/capita. Vail was the leader for publications/surgeon and population. The top four cities of New York, Philadelphia, Boston, and Chicago were responsible for 28% of the academic output over the 5-year study period.

show abstract

“…Recent evidence suggests that orthopaedic surgeons do consider JIF to be important when making clinical decisions. 17 , 18 Therefore, the potential for citation skew could undermine this process. If citation skew does indeed exist in the orthopaedic literature, then these clinical decisions could be considered to be based on injudicious information.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Journal Impact Factor of Orthopaedic Journals Does not Predict Individual Paper Citation Rate

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The journal impact factor (JIF) is thought to reflect the average number of citations an article will receive and therefore can influence study impact and clinical decision making. However, analysis of citation rates across multiple scientific and research domains has shown that most articles will not reach this expected number of citations. This phenomenon is known as citation skew and it has not previously been examined in the orthopaedic literature. The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which citation skew exists within orthopaedic journals and thus to determine whether the JIF in the orthopaedic literature reflects individual study citation rates.Methods:We used data from the Thomson Reuters (now Clarivate Analytics) Web of Science to determine the 2015 JIF and citation distribution for all orthopaedic journals listed in the database. We calculated the percentage of articles with fewer citations than the JIF for each journal. Finally, we analyzed the citation distribution within groups of orthopaedic subspecialty publications.Results:We identified a total of 74 orthopaedic journals and 29,296 publications for the years 2013 and 2014. Across all orthopaedic journals, 85% of published articles are cited fewer times than the JIF would indicate. The median number of citations of all articles was zero for all journals (interquartile range = 0-0) except for seven journals, for which the median number of citations per article was 1.Conclusion:Citation skew is prevalent across the orthopaedic literature. Most published work is not cited in the first 2 years following publication, and the JIFs are the result of a few highly cited articles. The assessment of an individual orthopaedic study's quality should not be determined by the JIF but rather by direct evaluation of the methodology, relevance, and appropriateness of the study's conclusions.

show abstract

An international survey to identify the intrinsic and extrinsic factors of research studies most likely to change orthopaedic practice

Cited by 8 publications

References 34 publications

Skin closure in arthroplasty surgery: Current practice

Skin closure in arthroplasty surgery: Current practice

Orthopaedic Academic Activity in the United States: Bibliometric Analysis of Publications by City and State

The Journal Impact Factor of Orthopaedic Journals Does not Predict Individual Paper Citation Rate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About