Tech-trends in orthopedics 2018

Gordon, Max

doi:10.1080/17453674.2018.1518806

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Orthopaedic surgery is one of the most rapidly developing fields in medicine. 8 , 31 The development of new procedures and operative concepts necessitates an emphasis on quality research in the field to provide strong, evidence-based care. However, the cost of performing high-quality, prospective studies to assess new devices and techniques can be steep.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is There an Association Between Authors’ Conflicts of Interest and Outcomes in Clinical Studies Involving Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation?

Mayo

Ravella

Onsen

et al. 2021

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) is an increasingly popular technique for the treatment of articular cartilage defects. Because several companies have financial interests in ACI, it is important to consider possible conflicts of interest when evaluating studies reporting outcomes of ACI. Purpose: To determine whether there is an association between authors’ financial conflicts of interest and the outcomes of ACI studies. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases for “autologous chondrocyte implantation” was performed. Clinical studies published after 2012 through May 15, 2019, and in English were included. Studies were determined to have financial conflicts of interest if any contributing author had relevant conflicts, either self-reported in the published study’s disclosures section or reported online in the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Disclosure database or the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database. The outcomes of each study were rated as favorable, equivocal, or unfavorable based on predefined criteria and then tested for association with conflicts of interest through use of the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 79 studies met the inclusion criteria. Nearly all studies were of level 3 or 4 evidence. Conflicts of interest were established in 51.90% of studies (n = 41). Conflicts that were not self-reported by the authors were discovered in 18% of studies. The level of evidence was not associated with conflict of interest. No statistically significant difference was found in the rate of favorable outcomes between studies with conflicts (92.68%) and those with no conflicts (81.58%) ( P = .126). Publications by US authors were more likely to have financial conflicts of interest ( P = .003). Conclusion: Favorable results were reported in a majority of studies involving ACI. No statistical association was found between the frequency of favorable outcomes and the presence of financial conflicts of interest, country of authorship, or level of evidence. There was a trend toward more favorable outcomes in studies with conflicts of interest. Additionally, nearly 20% of publications had possible conflicts found online that were not self-reported. It is critical for orthopaedic surgeons to judiciously evaluate published studies and consider financial conflicts of interest before performing ACI techniques on patients.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is There an Association Between Authors’ Conflicts of Interest and Outcomes in Clinical Studies Involving Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation?

Mayo

Ravella

Onsen

et al. 2021

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of neural networks was not more accurate than the other methods. Neural networks have become very popular in recent years, especially the use of convolutional neural networks for image classification [ 17 ]. The result of this study can be a healthy reminder that this method is maybe not always the best choice for all type of prediction and it could be worthwhile to try different methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring adverse events following hip arthroplasty surgery using administrative data without relying on ICD-codes

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Measure and monitor adverse events (AEs) following hip arthroplasty is challenging. The aim of this study was to create a model for measuring AEs after hip arthroplasty using administrative data, such as length of stay and readmissions, with equal or better precision than an ICD-code based model. Materials and methods This study included 1 998 patients operated with an acute or elective hip arthroplasty in a national multi-centre study. We collected AEs within 90 days following surgery with retrospective record review. Additional data came from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, the Swedish National Patient Register and the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. We made a 2:1 split of the data into a training and a holdout set. We used the training set to train different machine learning models to predict if a patient had sustained an AE or not. After training and cross-validation we tested the best performing model on the holdout-set. We compared the results with an established ICD-code based measure for AEs. Results The best performing model was a logistic regression model with four natural age splines. The variables included in the model were as follows: length of stay at the orthopaedic department, discharge to acute care, age, number of readmissions and ED visits. The sensitivity and specificity for the new model was 23 and 90% for AE within 30 days, compared with 5 and 94% for the ICD-code based model. For AEs within 90 days the sensitivity and specificity were 31% and 89% compared with 16% and 92% for the ICD-code based model. Conclusion We conclude that a prediction model for AEs following hip arthroplasty surgery, relying on administrative data without ICD-codes is more accurate than a model based on ICD-codes.

show abstract

“…Given the rapid pace of innovation and incorporation of new technologies into musculoskeletal medicine and orthopaedics, evaluating current and future trends is critical for identifying areas receiving increased interest and investment. 11,12 Furthermore, such trends might highlight areas that are potentially ready for innovation adoption. As such, this study aimed to assess patent activity and relative growth of technologies in musculoskeletal medicine and orthopaedics over the past five decades.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Forty-Six Years of Technological Innovation in Musculoskeletal Medicine: An Analysis of a Patent Database (1973 to 2018)

Potluri,

Arza,

Rullán

et al. 2023

J Am Acad Orthop Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Technological innovation in orthopaedics is key to advancing patient care. As emerging technologies near maturity, clinicians must be able to objectively assess where and when these technologies can be implemented. Patent databases are an underappreciated resource for quantifying innovation, especially within orthopaedic surgery. This study used a patent database to assess patent activity and relative growth of technologies in musculoskeletal medicine and orthopaedics over a period of 46 years. Methods: A total of 121,471 patent records were indexed from Lens.org, a patent database. These patents were grouped into subspecialty clusters and technology clusters using patent codes. Five-year (2014 to 2018), 10-year (2009 to 2018), and 30-year (1989 to 2018) compound annual growth rates were calculated and compared for each cluster. Results: Annual patent activity increased from one patent in 1973 to 4,866 patents in 2018. Of the eight subspecialty clusters, the largest number of patents were related to ‘Inflammation’ (n = 63,128; 40.57%). The ‘Elbow’, ‘Shoulder’, and ‘Knee’ clusters experienced increased annual patent activity since 2000. Of the 12 technological clusters, the largest number of patents were related to ‘Drugs’ (n = 55,324; 39.75%). The ‘Custom/patient-specific instrumentation, ‘Computer Modeling’, ‘Robotics’, and ‘Navigation’ clusters saw growth in the average annual patent activity since 2000. Discussion: Innovation, as measured by patent activity in musculoskeletal medicine and orthopaedics, has seen notable growth since 1973. The ‘Robotics’ cluster seems poised to experience exponential growth in industry investment and technological developments over the next 5 to 10 years. The ‘Diagnostics’, ‘Computer Modeling’, ‘Navigation’, and ‘Design and Manufacturing’ clusters demonstrate potential for exponential growth in industry investment and technological developments within the next 10 to 20 years.

show abstract

Tech-trends in orthopedics 2018

Cited by 5 publications

References 26 publications

Is There an Association Between Authors’ Conflicts of Interest and Outcomes in Clinical Studies Involving Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation?

Is There an Association Between Authors’ Conflicts of Interest and Outcomes in Clinical Studies Involving Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation?

Measuring adverse events following hip arthroplasty surgery using administrative data without relying on ICD-codes

Forty-Six Years of Technological Innovation in Musculoskeletal Medicine: An Analysis of a Patent Database (1973 to 2018)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About