2018
DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2018.03.040
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patient-Perceived Recovery and Outcomes After Silastic Implant Arthroplasty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

1
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Silicone implants are frequently used for arthroplasty of the metatarsophalangeal joint which is damaged due to diseases such as osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis that generate alterations of gait [1][2][3][4] and limitations in daily activities. 5 The joint replacement with an implant is one of the various forms of surgical treatment for advanced stages of the pathology hallux rigidus.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Silicone implants are frequently used for arthroplasty of the metatarsophalangeal joint which is damaged due to diseases such as osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis that generate alterations of gait [1][2][3][4] and limitations in daily activities. 5 The joint replacement with an implant is one of the various forms of surgical treatment for advanced stages of the pathology hallux rigidus.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Results. Overall, the mean VAS reported to the residents (4.97 ± 2.75) [1][2][3] Bundled payments reimbursing physicians based on the quality and value of the care delivered continue to supersede traditional fee-for-service models, as governments and third party payees attempt to standardize fee schedules to better align with financial incentives geared toward cost containment. 4 In the current era of health care reform, value is defined as the outcome of an intervention as assessed by subjective (satisfaction, experience, clinical examination, imaging) and/or objective methods (PROMs, PROMIS), relative to its cost (value = outcome/ cost).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Although physicians, third party payees, and governments are all interested in defining and improving treatment outcomes, relying on one assessment method over the other (subjective vs objective) can lead to false impressions, as can methods incorporating both. 3,6 Moreover, despite the increased reliance on PROMs within the orthopaedic community, implementation into routine clinical practice remains far from ubiquitous, and ambiguity exists regarding how PROMs change over time, at what temporal points they should be collected, and by whom.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%