Awareness of predatory journals and open access publishing among orthopaedic and trauma surgeons – results from an online survey in Germany

Background Along with emerging open access journals (OAJ) predatory journals increasingly appear. As they harm accurate and good scientific research, we aimed to examine the awareness of predatory journals and open access publishing among orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Methods In an online survey between August and December 2019 the knowledge on predatory journals and OAJ was tested with a hyperlink made available to the participants via the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery (DGOU) email distributor. Results Three hundred fifty orthopaedic and trauma surgeons participated, of which 291 complete responses (231 males (79.4%), 54 females (18.6%) and 5 N/A (2.0%)) were obtained. 39.9% were aware of predatory journals. However, 21.0% knew about the “Directory of Open Access Journals” (DOAJ) as a register for non-predatory open access journals. The level of profession (e.g. clinic director, consultant) (p = 0.018) influenced the awareness of predatory journals. Interestingly, participants aware of predatory journals had more often been listed as corresponding authors (p < 0.001) and were well published as first or last author (p < 0.001). Awareness of OAJ was masked when journal selection options did not to provide any information on the editorial board, the peer review process or the publication costs. Conclusion The impending hazard of predatory journals is unknown to many orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Early stage clinical researchers must be trained to differentiate between predatory and scientifically accurate journals

Evidence of Prolonged Monitoring of Trauma Patients Admitted via Trauma Resuscitation Unit without Primary Proof of Severe Injuries

Introductio: Although management of severely injured patients in the Trauma Resuscitation Unit (TRU) follows evidence-based guidelines, algorithms for treatment of the slightly injured are limited. Methods: All trauma patients in a period of eight months in a Level I trauma center were followed. Retrospective analysis was performed only in patients &ge;18 years with primary TRU admission, Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) &le; 1, Maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (MAIS) &le; 1 and Injury Severity Score (ISS) &le;3 after treatment completion and &ge;24 h monitoring in the units. Cochran&rsquo;s Q-test was used for the statistical evaluation of AIS and ISS changes in units. Results: One hundred and twelve patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty-one patients (18.75%) reported new complaints after treatment completion in the TRU. AIS rose from the Intermediate Care Unit (IMC) to Normal Care Unit (NCU) 6.2% and ISS 6.9%. MAIS did not increase &gt;2, and no intervention was necessary for any patient. No correlation was found between computed tomography (CT) diagnostics in TRU and AIS change. Conclusions: The data suggest that AIS, MAIS and ISS did not increase significantly in patients without a severe injury during inpatient treatment, regardless of the type of CT diagnostics performed in the TRU, suggesting that monitoring of these patients may be unnecessary

Surgical treatment outcome after serial debridement of infected nonunion—A retrospective cohort study

Purpose Reported outcome after multiple staged surgical treatment of infected nonunion is scarce. We, therefore, asked: (1) What is the clinical outcome in infected nonunion patients after multiple staged revision surgery? (2) Are different pathogens evidenced after surgical treatment in patients who have undergone more or less surgeries? Methods All enrolled patients were surgically treated for long bone-infected nonunion between January 2010 and March 2018. Besides patients´ demographics outcome in terms of bony consolidation and major complications defined as death during inward treatment, amputation and recurrence of infection during follow-up of at least 12 months were assessed. Microbiological findings were assessed and compared between two groups with less than five versus five or more surgical revisions. Results Bone consolidation was achieved in 86% of the patients while complications such as femoral or transtibial amputation, recurrence of infection or even death during inpatient treatment could be evidenced in six patients (14%). In patients who underwent multiple-stage surgery for five or more times, germ changes and repeated germ detection was more common than in patients with less surgeries. Conclusions Surgical treatment of infected nonunions poses a high burden on the patients with major complications occurring in about 14% of the patients using a multiple staged treatment concept. Future prospective studies comparing outcomes after limited with multiple staged revision surgeries are necessary