Background:Prevalence estimates of heterotopic ossification (HO) following cervical artificial disc replacement (ADR) varied widely in previous studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize its point prevalence.Methods:Electronic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were conducted to identify studies that reported prevalence of HO. Definitions of HO and severe HO were based on McAfee grading system. Random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence. We conducted subgroup analyses according to the different length of follow-up time, and performed univariate metaregression analyses to explore the effects of potential variables on the overall prevalence.Results:A total of 38 studies were included in this study. The pooled data showed that the prevalence of HO after cervical ADR within the 1 to 2 years, 2 to 5 years, and 5 to10 years of follow-up was 38.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.2%–46.5%), 52.6% (95% CI, 43.1%–61.9%), and 53.6% (95% CI, 40.0%–66.7%), respectively, while the prevalence of severe HO was 10.9% (95% CI, 9.0%–13.2%), 22.2% (95% CI, 15.5%–30.7%), and 47.5% (95% CI, 30.0%–65.8%), respectively. Follow-up time was positively associated with the prevalence of severe HO (P < .01), and the 1-month growth of mean follow-up went with 0.63% increase of severe HO.Conclusion:This meta-analysis reported data on the prevalence of HO and severe HO after cervical ADR, and provided information on its process of development. These should be useful to enable surgeons and patients to gain a better understanding of HO after cervical ADR.
BackgroundEfficient HIV prevention requires accurate identification of individuals with risky sexual behaviour. However, self-reported data from sexual behaviour surveys are prone to social desirability bias (SDB). Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI) has been suggested as an alternative to face-to-face interviewing (FTFI), because it may promote interview privacy and reduce SDB. However, little is known about the suitability and accuracy of ACASI in urban communities with high HIV prevalence in South Africa. To test this, we conducted a sexual behaviour survey in Cape Town, South Africa, using ACASI methods.MethodsParticipants (n = 878) answered questions about their sexual relationships on a touch screen computer in a private mobile office. We included questions at the end of the ACASI survey that were used to assess participants’ perceived ease of use, privacy, and truthfulness. Univariate logistic regression models, supported by multivariate models, were applied to identify groups of people who had adverse interviewing experiences. Further, we constructed male–female ratios of self-reported sexual behaviours as indicators of SDB. We used these indicators to compare SDB in our survey and in recent FTFI-based Demographic and Health Surveys (DHSs) from Lesotho, Swaziland, and Zimbabwe.ResultsMost participants found our methods easy to use (85.9%), perceived privacy (96.3%) and preferred ACASI to other modes of inquiry (82.5%) when reporting on sexual behaviours. Unemployed participants and those in the 40–70 year old age group were the least likely to find our methods easy to use (OR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.47–1.01 and OR 0.37; 95% CI: 0.23–0.58, respectively). In our survey, the male–female ratio for reporting >2 sexual partners in the past year, a concurrent relationship in the past year, and > 2 sexual partners in a lifetime was 3.4, 2.6, and 1.2, respectively— far lower than the ratios observed in the Demographic and Health Surveys.ConclusionsOur analysis suggests that most participants in our survey found the ACASI modality to be acceptable, private, and user-friendly. Moreover, our results indicate lower SDB than in FTFI techniques. Targeting older and unemployed participants for ACASI training prior to taking the survey may help to improve their perception of ease and privacy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.