The orthopaedic research scene and strategies to improve it (original) (raw)
Related papers
Improvement of research quality in the fields of orthopaedics and trauma—a global perspective
International Orthopaedics, 2013
The international orthopaedic community aims to achieve the best possible outcome for patient care by constantly modifying surgical techniques and expanding the surgeon's knowledge. These efforts require proper reflection within a setting that necessitates a higher quality standard for global orthopaedic publication. Furthermore, these techniques demand that surgeons acquire information at standards of systematic research. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to describe these performance standards, the available choices for orthopaedic surgeons and the current learning curve for seasoned teams of researchers and orthopaedic surgeons with more than three decades of experience. These lead to provide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the topics that will significantly influence the research development as we arrive at an important globalisation era in orthopaedics and trauma-related research.
The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society
The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume, 2011
The Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society was started in an endeavour to answer the difficult problem of obtaining enough patients to perform top-quality research into fractures. By maintaining a high standard, including randomised study design, inclusivity, open discussion among surgeons and excellent long-term follow-up, this group has become a leader in the orthopaedic research community. This annotation describes the short history, important components and spirit necessary to build a research community or team which will function well despite the difficult research environment facing individual surgeons.
Are UK and Ireland trauma and orthopaedic surgeons maintaining their research output?
The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2020
Introduction Healthcare faces growing challenges. With reports of diminishing research output from the UK and Ireland in the leading surgical journals, this study aimed to ascertain whether this trend had been echoed in the trauma and orthopaedic literature. Materials and methods Citable research output from the 10 globally leading trauma and orthopaedic journals was analysed from five individual years, over a 20-year period, to ascertain trends in absolute output, geographical mix, and level of evidence. Results The overall number of published articles fell by 14.5%. North America saw the greatest decline (–8.0%), followed by Japan (–5.6%) and Europe (–3.3%). The UK and Ireland (+2.9%) and the rest of the world (+13.9%) saw rising output. A decline in lower (levels IV and V) and a rise in higher (levels I, II and III) quality evidence was observed. The UK and Ireland had a greater proportion of higher-quality studies than North America and Japan, but lower than Europe and the rest ...
Injury, 2008
There is a growing consensus that randomised controlled clinical trial (RCT) provide a secure basis for determining treatment effects. Prospective randomised clinical trials can be a powerful tool in medical science and evidence-based medicine. A well-defined study hypothesis, with a prospectively applied study design, blinded and randomised treatment allocation and assessment, with appropriate control groups can provide strong evidence in support of treatment decisions. However, the recent reviews of the medical literature indicate that the study design itself does not ensure the quality of science or useful and valid scientific data. Thus, regardless of the study design or level of evidence, it remains imperative for the physician and surgeon to critically evaluate a scientific report. Moreover, as randomisation, concealment of treatment allocation and blinding are difficult issues to resolve in orthopaedic surgery, future trials should focus on detailed and correct reporting of outcome measures.
Outcomes in orthopedics and traumatology: translating research into practice
Acta Ortopédica Brasileira, 2014
Clinical research is focused in generating evidence that is feasible to be applicable to practitioners. However, translating research-focused evidence into practice may be challenging and often misleading. This article aims is to pinpoint these challenges and suggest some methodological safeguards, taking platelet-rich plasma therapies and knee osteochondral injuries as examples. Studies and systematic reviews involving the following concepts will be investigated: clinically relevant outcomes, systematic errors on sample calculation, internal and external validity. Relevant studies on platelet-rich plasma for muscle--tendon lesions and updates on osteochondral lesions treatment were included in this analysis. Authors and clinicians should consider these concepts for the implementation and application of dissemination of the best evidence. Research results should be challenged by a weighted analysis of its methodological soundness and applicability. Level of Evidence V, Therapeutic Studies -Investigating the Results of Treatment.
Journal of European CME, 2017
Introduction: To ensure best-quality education in orthopaedic trauma, the AOTrauma Education Commission conducted a Global Needs Analysis with practising surgeons worldwide. Material and methods: During July to November 2012, an email invitation to complete an online set of 30 questions in eight languages was sent to our members and associates in all countries through AOTrauma's regional networks. Non-members were invited to participate through collaboration with orthopaedic societies. Results: A total of 3,790 surgeons practising orthopaedic trauma (49%), orthopaedic (15%), general trauma (15%) and specialty orthopaedic (13%) surgeons responded worldwide. Seventy per cent completed all questions, and the top 10 countries accounted for half the responses. The top 3 areas of educational need were orthopaedic trauma, joint replacement and preservation, and pelvis and acetabulum. Aspects influencing likelihood to attend face-to-face courses were: expert faculty, focus on a specific topic, clear objectives, and discussion and feedback from experts. Barriers to attending courses were time away from practice, cost and lack of availability or access. Conclusion: The Global Needs Analysis helped our educational committees to identify short-and mid-term priorities over recent years. Adjustments in our planning have helped meet the needs of our audience on a global, regional and national level.
The future of basic science in orthopaedics and traumatology: Cassandra or Prometheus?
European Journal of Medical Research, 2021
Orthopaedic and trauma research is a gateway to better health and mobility, reflecting the ever-increasing and complex burden of musculoskeletal diseases and injuries in Germany, Europe and worldwide. Basic science in orthopaedics and traumatology addresses the complete organism down to the molecule among an entire life of musculoskeletal mobility. Reflecting the complex and intertwined underlying mechanisms, cooperative research in this field has discovered important mechanisms on the molecular, cellular and organ levels, which subsequently led to innovative diagnostic and therapeutic strategies that reduced individual suffering as well as the burden on the society. However, research efforts are considerably threatened by economical pressures on clinicians and scientists, growing obstacles for urgently needed translational animal research, and insufficient funding. Although sophisticated science is feasible and realized in ever more individual research groups, a main goal of the mu...
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2008
Background Evidence-based medicine posits that health care research is founded upon clinically important differences in patient centered outcomes. Statistically significant differences between two treatments may not necessarily reflect a clinically important difference. We aimed to quantify the sample sizes and magnitude of treatment effects in a review of orthopaedic randomized trials with statistically significant findings. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search (PubMed, Cochrane) for all randomized controlled trials between 1/1/95 to 12/31/04. Eligible studies include those that focused upon orthopaedic trauma. Baseline characteristics and treatment effects were abstracted by two reviewers. Briefly, for continuous outcome measures (ie functional scores), we calculated effect sizes (mean difference/standard deviation). Dichotomous variables (ie infection, nonunion) were summarized as absolute risk differences and relative risk reductions (RRR). Effect sizes >0.80 and RRRs&...