Level of clinical evidence presented at the open and closed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons annual meeting over 10 years (2005-2014)

© 2016 The Author(s). Background: The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) annual scientific meetings are premier forums whereby orthopaedic surgeons are informed of the latest research advances in shoulder and elbow surgery. The purpose of the present study was to assess the Level of evidence (LOE) in the clinical papers presented at both the open and closed ASES annual scientific meetings from 2005 to 2014. Secondarily, the study evaluated whether there were any changes in the distribution of LOE over this period of time. Methods: Two reviewers independently evaluated the abstracts of 532 paper presentations at either the open or closed ASES annual meetings. The independent reviewers first screened the abstracts for clinical evidence and excluded cadaveric, biomechanical, technique, and review studies. The included abstracts were then independently graded for methodological quality using LOE from Level I (highest quality) to IV (lowest quality) based on the classification system created by The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). Results: Overall, 421 presentations were included and graded for LOE. In general, 17% of the presentations were graded level I; 15% level II; 25% level III; and 43% assigned a LOE of IV. Chi-square analysis demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in the LOE of presentations at the open and closed ASES meetings combined (p = 0.028) between the years 2005 and 2014. In particular, the proportion of presentations graded as level IV significantly decreased over this period (p = \u3c0.001). Conclusions: While most presentations at the ASES annual scientific meetings were of lower LOEs the percentage of level I evidence is greater than that reported at other Orthopaedic meetings. There has been a significant improvement in the LOE of clinical research at open and closed ASES meetings from 2005 to 2014. Specifically, the proportion of level IV studies have dramatically decreased over time

The rate of publication of free papers at the 2008 and 2010 European Society of Sports Traumatology Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy congresses

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency with which free papers presented at the 2008 and 2010 European Society of Sports Traumatology Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) congress were ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals. Moreover, this study evaluated whether any correlations exist between the level of evidence of the free papers and their frequency of publication or the impact factor of the journals in which they are published. Methods Free papers presented at the 2008 and 2010 ESSKA congresses were included for assessment. Clinical papers (observational studies and trials involving direct interaction between an investigator and human subjects) were graded for level of evidence by two independent reviewers. A comprehensive strategy was used to search the databases PubMed, Ovid (MEDLINE), and EMBASE for all publications corresponding to the included free papers. Results Three hundred-ninety presentations were evaluated, of which 215 (55%) were ultimately published in a peer-reviewed journal within five years of the presentation date. The mean time from presentation to publication was 16 months (SD 25 months). There was no significant difference in the distribution of the level of evidence between studies that were ultimately published, versus those that were not published (n.s.). The level of evidence of the published study was not a significant predictor of the impact factor of the journal in which it was published (n.s.). Presentations were most commonly published in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy (24%) and The American Journal of Sports Medicine (22%). Conclusion Free papers at the 2008 and 2010 ESSKA congress were published at a frequency that is comparable to that at other orthopaedic meetings. The publication rate was similar across all levels of evidence. Further encouragement of manuscript preparation and submission following these meetings could help to ensure important research findings are disseminated to large audiences

Arthroscopic Management of Septic Arthritis of the Native Shoulder: A Systematic Review

© 2017 Arthroscopy Association of North America Purpose: To investigate arthroscopic management of native shoulder joint septic arthritis—specifically, indications, patient outcomes, and complications. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were used to search the literature, and data abstraction was performed independently and in duplicate. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist guided reporting and data abstraction. The quality of all included studies was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. The results are presented in a narrative summary fashion using descriptive statistics including means, proportions, ranges, κ values, and intraclass correlation coefficient values. Results: Overall, 27 studies (19 case reports and 8 case series) were identified, including 115 patients (121 shoulders). The mean follow-up period was 29.1 months (range, 1-199 months). The indications for shoulder arthroscopy owing to infection included pain; limited range of motion; swelling, erythema, and tenderness; fever; elevated leukocyte count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and/or C-reactive protein level; synovial aspirate findings; and/or imaging findings. Overall, 46 patients (40%) achieved infection eradication and functional improvement after a single arthroscopic procedure. However, 43 patients (37%) had ongoing symptoms or complications, including 32 (30%) who required revision arthroscopic procedures, 7 (6%) who underwent open arthrotomy for septic arthritis management, 2 (2%) in whom avascular necrosis of the humeral head developed, 1 (1%) in whom adhesive capsulitis developed, and 1 (1%) in whom an irregular profile of the humeral epiphysis developed on plain radiographs. Conclusions: Arthroscopic management of native shoulder septic arthritis can yield alleviation of pain and a return to full range of motion, daily activities, and sports. However, there is a high reoperation rate, which may correlate with poor patient prognostic factors. This systematic review did not show the superiority of either arthroscopic surgery or open arthrotomy for the management of shoulder septic arthritis. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies

Anterior Capsule Reconstruction of the Native Hip: A Technique Guide

This is a technique guide for open anterior capsule reconstruction in unstable native hips due to Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Ehlers–Danlos syndrome is a connective tissue disease that predisposes an individual to hypermobility of their soft tissues and recurrent subluxations and dislocations of their joints. This may lead to constant instability, guarding of the hip, and subsequent arthritic changes and poor quality of life. We demonstrate anterior capsule reconstruction of the hip using an Achilles tendon allograft performed through a direct anterior approach to the hip (Heuter's approach). This technique guide outlines in detail the surgical steps required to accomplish this reconstructive procedure. Furthermore, a narrated surgical video is provided that clearly depicts the anticipated result of the increased constrained provided to the hip from the anterior capsule reconstruction using an Achilles tendon allograft

A scoping review of intimate partner violence assistance programmes within health care settings

Background: The lifetime prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) for women presenting to health care settings is estimated to be 38–59%. With the goal of providing help to victims of abuse, numerous IPV assistance programmes have been developed and evaluated across multiple health care settings. Objective: Our scoping review provides an overview of this literature to identify key areas for potential evidence-based recommendations and to focus research priorities. Methods: We conducted a search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and psycINFO. We used broad eligibility criteria to identify studies that evaluated the effectiveness of IPV assistance programmes delivered within health care settings. We completed all screening and data extraction independently and in duplicate. We used descriptive statistics to summarize all data. Results: Forty-three studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in our scoping review. Nine categories of assistance programmes were identified: counselling/advocacy, safety assessment/planning, referral, providing IPV resources, home visitation, case management, videos, provider cueing, and system changes. Characteristics of programmes amongst studies frequently reporting positive results included those in which one type of active assistance was used (77.8% of studies reported positive results), a counsellor, community worker, or case manager provided the intervention (83.3% of studies reported positive results), and programmes that were delivered over more than five sessions (100.0% of studies reported positive results). Conclusions: IPV assistance programmes are heterogeneous with regards to the types of assistance they include and how they are delivered and evaluated. This heterogeneity creates challenges in identifying which IPV assistance programmes, and which aspects of these programmes, are effective. However, it appears that many different types of IPV assistance programmes can have positive impacts on women

A Scoping Review of Intimate Partner Violence Screening Programs for Health Care Professionals

<div><p>Introduction</p><p>Between 38 and 59 percent of women presenting to health care professionals have experienced intimate partner violence. Consequently, multiple intimate partner violence identification or screening programs within health care settings have been developed; however, substantial variations in program content and interpretation of program effectiveness has resulted in conflicting practice guidelines. The purpose of our scoping review is to broadly identify and synthesize the available literature evaluating intimate partner violence identification programs within health care settings to identify key areas for potential evidence-based recommendations and to focus research priorities in the field.</p><p>Materials and Methods</p><p>We conducted a search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and psycINFO. We used broad eligibility criteria to identify studies that evaluated intimate partner violence identification programs in health care settings. We completed all screening and data extraction independently and in duplicate. We used descriptive statistics to summarize all data.</p><p>Results</p><p>We identified 59 eligible studies evaluating intimate partner violence identification programs within health care settings. The most commonly reported outcome themes were IPV disclosure (69%, n = 35), number of patients screened (39%, n = 20), HCP opinions towards screening (37%, n = 19), and patient opinions towards screening (29%, n = 15). The majority of studies (36 studies (70.6%)) reported positive program evaluation results.</p><p>Discussion</p><p>The majority of studies reported positive program evaluation results. This may suggest that many different intimate partner violence identification programs are beneficial for identifying victims of abuse, however, it remains unknown as to whether identification programs prevent future episodes of abuse. Additionally, the substantial heterogeneity of the intervention characteristics, study methodology, and outcome measures assessed limits the ability to make clear recommendations as to the optimal method(s) of screening.</p></div

Study Characteristics.

<p>Study Characteristics.</p

Study Design and Methodological Characteristics.

<p>Study Design and Methodological Characteristics.</p

Literature Search Results and Study Selection.

<p>Literature Search Results and Study Selection.</p