Fulfillment of Expectations After Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 1249-1259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jensen K. Henry ◽  
Andrew Roney ◽  
Elizabeth A. Cody ◽  
Amelia Hummel ◽  
Carol A. Mancuso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Score Improvement ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Shoe Wear

Background: To date, no study has assessed fulfillment of patients’ expectations after foot and ankle surgery. This study aimed to validate a method of assessing expectation fulfillment in foot/ankle patients postoperatively. Methods: Preoperatively, patients completed the expectations survey, consisting of 23 questions for domains including pain, ambulation, daily function, exercise, and shoe wear. At 2 years postoperatively, patients answered how much improvement they received for each item cited preoperatively. A fulfillment proportion (FP) was calculated as the amount of improvement received versus the amount of improvement expected. The FP ranges from 0 (no expectations fulfilled), to between 0 and 1 (expectations partially fulfilled), to 1 (expectations met), to greater than 1 (expectations surpassed). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and areas under the curve (AUCs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to compare the expectations survey to other outcome surveys, including Foot and Ankle Outcome Score, improvement, overall fulfillment, Delighted-Terrible scale, and satisfaction. Results: Of the 271 patients (mean age 55.4 years, mean BMI 27.5, 65% female), 34% had expectations surpassed (FP >1), 4% had expectations met, 58% had expectations partially fulfilled (FP between 0 and 1), and 5% had no expectations met. The mean FP was 0.84 ± 0.41 (range 0-3.13), indicating partially fulfilled expectations. FP correlated significantly with all outcome measures ( P ≤ .007). FP was associated most closely with satisfaction ( r = 0.66 [95% CI 0.57-0.75]; AUC = 0.92 [95% CI 0.88-0.96]; P < .001) and improvement ( r = 0.73 [95% CI 0.64-0.81]; AUC = 0.94 [95% CI 0.91-0.96]; P < .001). Based on the associations with satisfaction and improvement outcomes, a clinically important proportion of expectations fulfilled is 0.68, with sensitivity 0.85-0.90 and specificity 0.84-0.86. Conclusion: The proportion of expectations fulfilled is a novel patient-centered outcome that correlated with validated outcome measures. The expectations survey may be used by surgeons to counsel patients preoperatively and also to assess patients’ results postoperatively. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative series.

scholarly journals Fulfillment of Expectations after Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Surgery: An Analysis of 271 Patients with 2-year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011419S0003
Author(s):  
Jensen K. Henry ◽  
Andrew Roney ◽  
Amelia Hummel ◽  
Elizabeth Cody ◽  
Scott Ellis
Keyword(s):  
Roc Curves ◽  
Hallux Rigidus ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Ankle Arthritis ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool ◽  
Shoe Wear

Category: Ankle, Ankle Arthritis, Arthroscopy, Bunion, Hindfoot, Lesser Toes, Midfoot/Forefoot, Sports, General Foot/Ankle, Outcomes, Satisfaction Introduction/Purpose: Success in orthopaedic surgery was traditionally defined by postoperative radiographs or legacy outcomes scores, but increasingly incorporates more patient-centered metrics. Patient expectations are one such measure, and have been described using a new validated survey for foot/ankle patients. Understanding patients’ expectations of surgery is critical in order to facilitate shared decision-making and set reasonable goals for outcomes. In other specialties, postoperative expectations surveys have also been created and shown to correlate with measures of satisfaction and traditional patient-reported outcomes scores. However, there are no such studies in the foot and ankle literature. This study aimed to validate a method of assessing expectation fulfillment in foot/ankle patients postoperatively. We hypothesized that the survey would significantly correlate with measures of improvement, satisfaction, and clinical outcomes scores. Methods: This is a single-center prospective study of patients undergoing elective foot and ankle procedures. Preoperative demographics, clinical data, and Foot & Ankle Outcomes Score (FAOS) were collected. Patients completed the expectations survey, consisting of 23 questions for domains including pain, ambulation, daily functioning, exercise/sports, shoe wear, and generalized items like “improving confidence in foot/ankle” and ”going back to normal.” Postoperatively, patients answered how much improvement they received for each item listed on the preoperative survey. Using previously validated methods, the proportion of expectations fulfilled was calculated as a ratio of the preoperative to postoperative expectations score, with values of 0 -1 indicating some expectations met, 1 indicating expectations met; and >1 indicating expectations surpassed. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and areas under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to compare the expectations survey to other outcomes scales, including FAOS, perceived improvement, overall fulfillment, Delighted-Terrible scale, and satisfaction. Results: 271/340 (80%) of patients with preoperative data completed 2-year follow-up (mean age 55.4 years, mean BMI 27.5, 65% female). Most common diagnoses were hallux valgus (25%), flatfoot (11%), hallux rigidus (11%), and ankle arthritis (10%). Mean proportion of expectations fulfilled was 1.15, indicating surpassed expectations. The proportion of expectations fulfilled correlated best with perceived improvement, global expectation fulfillment, and the Delighted-Terrible scale, and to a lesser degree with satisfaction and change in FAOS (all except activity). Based on the inflection point of the ROC curves corresponding to greatest AUC (Table), a clinically important proportion of expectations fulfilled was 0.81 and correlated with feeling delighted (sensitivity 0.88, specificity 0.85), improvement (sensitivity 0.89, specificity 0.83), overall expectations (sensitivity 0.91, specificity 0.81), and satisfaction (sensitivity 0.85, specificity 0.81). Conclusion: The proportion of expectations fulfilled is a valid outcome tool for foot and ankle surgery. It is uniquely able to capture pre- and postoperative data in one value and can be tailored to each patient’s specific goals. This survey can be used by surgeons after a variety of procedures to assess if a patient’s specific expectations have been fulfilled after surgery. We can use this tool to assess which patient and surgical factors may influence the fulfillment of expectations. This, in turn, will help surgeons better indicate the appropriate procedure in the optimal patient to achieve the greatest postoperative success.

scholarly journals Trends of Foot and Ankle Publishing in JBJS[A] over a 15 Year Period From 2004-2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011420S0010
Author(s):  
Bradley Alexander ◽  
James Hicks ◽  
Abhinav Agarwal ◽  
Aaradhana J. Jha ◽  
Spaulding F. Solar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Geographic Origin ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Quality Research ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Ankle Research ◽  
Quality Of Research

Category: Other Introduction/Purpose: As the field of foot and ankle surgery grows and new innovations continue to be made it is important that the quality of research improves. This will help to lay a strong foundation for current and future surgeons in the field. Leading journals need to set the tone for all orthopedic journals by publishing quality literature. This current study will look at all foot and ankle articles published by JBJS[A] over a 15-year period and analyze authorship, article type, geographic origin of articles, and level of evidence trends. This study will give a representative view of where foot and ankle research is currently and where it can go as we enter the new decade. Methods: A foot and ankle research fellow reviewed all of the articles published in JBJS[A] from January 2004 to December of 2018. Articles that related to foot and ankle topics were then selected to analyzed. Editorials, letters to the editor, announcements, technical notes, retraction notes, events, errata, retracted manuscripts, historical papers and pediatric foot and ankle articles were excluded. After exclusions were applied 321 and information pertaining to each article was analyzed. Additionally, a Google Scholar search was conducted for each article to determine the number of times an article had been cited. For calculations relating to median number of citations for each article we excluded articles that were published less than three years ago (2017 and 2018). For level of evidence a kappa value (0.82) was calculated to measure interobserver reliability between two reviewers. Results: We found the following results to be significant. Clinical therapeutic studies were the predominant study design over 15 years. The amount of literature over ankle arthroplasty has increased more than any other article topic. The amount of level IV and V evidence has decreased and the amount of level II and III evidence has increased. The median number of authors has been increasing. This includes female authorship. There has been in an increase in MD, PhDs as last authors. There is more foot and ankle research being produced by Asian countries. A majority of high level of evidence articles (level I and II) comes from North America and Europe. Level of evidence doesn’t correlate with the amount of times an article is cited. Conclusion: As the field of foot and ankle surgery continues to grow it is important that there is a high quality of research being conducted and published to guide surgical and clinical decisions. Our study shows that research is being produced more globally and the number of individuals involved in the research process is increasing and diversifying. This has led to higher quality research being produced (more level II and III) and a decrease in lower quality research (IV and V). Overall, the standard of research has increased in JBJS[A] which benefits the foot and ankle surgery community. [Table: see text]

Comparison of Patients’ and Surgeons’ Expectations in Foot and Ankle Surgery

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (10) ◽  
pp. 1173-1180
Author(s):  
Aoife MacMahon ◽  
Elizabeth A. Cody ◽  
Kristin Caolo ◽  
Jensen K. Henry ◽  
Mark C. Drakos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Minor Surgery ◽  
Special Surgery ◽  
Individual Surgeon ◽  
Prospective Comparative Study ◽  
Pain At Rest

Background: Aligning patient and surgeon expectations may improve patient satisfaction and outcomes. This study aimed to assess differences in expectations of foot and ankle surgery between patients and their surgeons. Methods: Two hundred two patients scheduled to undergo foot or ankle surgery by one of 7 fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeons were enrolled. Preoperatively, patients and surgeons completed the Hospital for Special Surgery Foot & Ankle Surgery Expectations Survey independently. Differences between patient and surgeon overall expectations scores, number of expectations, and number of expectations with complete improvement expected were assessed. A difference of ≥10 points was considered a clinically important difference in expectations score. Associations between patient demographic and clinical characteristics, major/minor surgery, and individual surgeon with differences in expectations were also assessed. Results: Overall, 66.3% of patients had higher expectations, 21.3% had concordant expectations, and 12.4% had lower expectations compared with their surgeons. On average, patients had higher expectations scores than their surgeons (70 ± 20 vs 52 ± 20 points, P < .001). Patients expected complete improvement in a greater number of expectations than surgeons (mean 11 ± 7 vs 1 ± 3, P < .001). Patients had higher expectations than surgeons for 18 of 23 items (78%). Items that had the greatest number of patients with higher expectations than surgeons were “improve confidence in foot/ankle,” “prevent foot/ankle from getting worse,” and “improve pain at rest.” Higher body mass index (BMI) ( P = .027) and individual surgeon ( P < .001) were associated with greater differences between patient-surgeon expectations. Major/minor surgery was not associated with differences in expectations ( P ≥ .142). Conclusion: More than two-thirds of patients had significantly higher expectations than their surgeons. Higher BMI was associated with higher patient than surgeon expectations. These results emphasize the importance for foot and ankle surgeons to adequately educate patients preoperatively. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.

Research Productivity of Foot and Ankle Fellowship Faculty

2020 ◽  
pp. 193864002097010
Author(s):  
Nathan Sherman ◽  
Nathaniel Bridge ◽  
Ansab Khwaja ◽  
Peter Du ◽  
Lisa Truchan
Keyword(s):  
Research Productivity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Publication Productivity ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
H Index ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Fellowship Programs ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Number Of Publications

Background Contribution to literature is critical for progress in the field of orthopaedics. No previous study has yet examined the academic productivity of foot and ankle surgery fellowship faculty. Purpose To evaluate the publishing productivity of foot and ankle fellowship faculty. Methods Faculty and program characteristics of orthopaedic foot and ankle fellowship programs across the United States and Canada were collected from American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and program websites. Faculty publication productivity measures, including publications, number of publications in specific journals, number of citations, and Hirsch index (h-index) were gathered using the Scopus database. Results A total of 48 AOFAS foot and ankle surgery fellowship programs were identified with an associated 185 faculty members. The mean number of publications per faculty member was 44.9 (SD = 53.0; range = 0-323), with a mean h-index of 11.9 (SD = 10.6; range = 0-54). A total of 144 (77.8%) academic-affiliated faculty had a significantly greater number of publications ( P < .01), total citations ( P < .05), and publications in Foot and Ankle International ( P < .05), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery ( P < .05), Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ( P < .05), and Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons ( P < .05) compared to the 41 (22.2%) nonacademic faculty. There were no significant differences between measures of publication productivity between male and female faculty, except for maximum citations in a single article (67.1 vs 142.3; P < .05). Conclusions Academic-affiliated foot and ankle fellowship faculty have higher research productivity than nonacademic surgeons. The mean h-index of foot and ankle fellowship faculty was 11.9, which is lower than that reported in sports, joints, and spine fellowship faculty but higher than that reported for hand fellowship faculty. Level of Evidence: Level IV

scholarly journals Incidence and Risk Factors of Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism Following Foot and Ankle Surgery

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Marie Richey ◽  
Miranda Lucia Ritterman Weintraub ◽  
John M. Schuberth
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Hormone Replacement ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
History Of ◽  
Low Incidence ◽  
Predictive Risk

Background: The incidence rate of venous thrombotic events (VTEs) following foot and ankle surgery is low. Currently, there is no consensus regarding postoperative prophylaxis or evidence to support risk stratification. Methods: A 2-part study assessing the incidence and factors for the development of VTE was conducted: (1) a retrospective observational cohort study of 22 486 adults to calculate the overall incidence following foot and/or ankle surgery from January 2008 to May 2011 and (2) a retrospective matched case-control study to identify risk factors for development of VTE postsurgery. One control per VTE case matched on age and sex was randomly selected from the remaining patients. Results: The overall incidence of VTE was 0.9%. Predictive risk factors in bivariate analyses included obesity, history of VTE, history of trauma, use of hormonal replacement or oral contraception therapy, anatomic location of surgery, procedure duration 60 minutes or more, general anesthesia, postoperative nonweightbearing immobilization greater than 2 weeks, and use of anticoagulation. When significant variables from bivariate analyses were placed into the multivariable regression model, 4 remained statistically significant: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for obesity, 6.1; history of VTE, 15.7; use of hormone replacement therapy, 8.9; and postoperative nonweightbearing immobilization greater than 2 weeks, 9.0. The risk of VTE increased significantly with 3 or more risk factors ( P = .001). Conclusion: The overall low incidence of VTE following foot and ankle surgery does not support routine prophylaxis for all patients. Among patients with 3 or more risk factors, the use of chemoprophylaxis may be warranted. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective case series.

scholarly journals Responsiveness of the PROMIS and FAAM Instruments in Foot and Ankle Orthopedic Population

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Man Hung ◽  
Judith F. Baumhauer ◽  
Frank W. Licari ◽  
Jerry Bounsanga ◽  
Maren W. Voss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Test ◽  
Measurement Information ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Paired Samples ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Prospective Comparative Study ◽  
Ability Measure

Background: Investigating the responsiveness of an instrument is important in order to provide meaningful interpretation of clinical outcomes. This study examined the responsiveness of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF), the PROMIS Pain Interference (PI), and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) Sports subscale in an orthopedic sample with foot and ankle ailments. Methods: Patients presenting to an orthopedic foot and ankle clinic during the years 2014–2017 responded to the PROMIS and FAAM instruments prior to their clinical appointments. The responsiveness of the PROMIS PF v1.2, PROMIS PI v1.1, and FAAM Sports were assessed using paired samples t test, effect size (ES), and standardized response mean (SRM) at 4 different follow-up points. A total of 785 patients with an average age of 52 years (SD = 17) were included. Results: The PROMIS PF had ESs of 0.95 to 1.22 across the 4 time points (3, >3, 6, and <6 months) and SRMs of 1.04 to 1.43. The PROMIS PI had ESs of 1.04 to 1.63 and SRMs of 1.17 to 1.23. For the FAAM Sports, the ESs were 1.25 to 1.31 and SRMs were 1.07 to 1.20. The ability to detect changes via paired samples t test provided mixed results. But in general, the patients with improvement had statistically significant improved scores, and the worsening patients had statistically significant worse scores. Conclusion: The PROMIS PF, PROMIS PI, and FAAM Sports were sensitive and responsive to changes in patient-reported health. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.

Application of Computerized Adaptive Testing to the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure

2020 ◽  
pp. 107110072097266
Author(s):  
Joseph T. O’Neil ◽  
Otho R. Plummer ◽  
Steven M. Raikin
Keyword(s):  
Computerized Adaptive Testing ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Adaptive Testing ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Ability Measure ◽  
The Impact

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures are an increasingly important tool for assessing the impact of treatments orthopedic surgeons render. Despite their importance, they can present a burden. We examined the validity and utility of a computerized adaptive testing (CAT) method to reduce the number of questions on the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), a validated anatomy-specific outcome measure. Methods: A previously developed FAAM CAT system was applied to the responses of patients undergoing foot and ankle evaluation and treatment over a 3-year period (2017-2019). A total of 15 902 responses for the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) subscale and a total of 14 344 responses for the Sports subscale were analyzed. The accuracy of the CAT to replicate the full-form score was assessed. Results: The CAT system required 11 questions to be answered for the ADL subscale in 85.1% of cases (range, 11-12). The number of questions answered on the Sports subscale was 6 (range, 5-6) in 66.4% of cases. The mean difference between the full FAAM ADL subscale and CAT was 0.63 of a point. The mean difference between the FAAM Sports subscale and CAT was 0.65 of a point. Conclusion: The FAAM CAT was able to reduce the number of responses a patient would need to answer by nearly 50%, while still providing a valid outcome score. This measure can therefore be directly correlated with previously obtained full FAAM scores in addition to providing a foot/ankle-specific measure, which previously reported CAT systems are not able to do. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series.

scholarly journals Comparison of Visual Analog Pain Score Reported to Physician vs Nurse in Nonoperatively Treated Foot and Ankle Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 1444-1448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin D. Martin ◽  
Trevor McBride ◽  
Jeffrey Wake ◽  
Jeffrey Preston Van Buren ◽  
Cuyler Dewar
Keyword(s):  
Pain Score ◽  
Operative Procedure ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Mean

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are taking a more prominent role in orthopedics as health care seeks to define treatment outcomes. The visual analog scale (VAS) is considered a reliable measure of acute pain. A previous study found that operative candidates’ VAS pain score was significantly higher when reported to the surgeon compared to the nurse. This study’s aim is to examine whether this phenomenon occurs in patients that do not undergo an operative procedure. We hypothesized that patients’ VAS pain scores reported to the surgeon vs the nurse would be the same. Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort of 201 consecutive nonoperative foot and ankle patients treated by a single surgeon. Patients were asked to rate pain intensity by a nurse followed by the surgeon using a horizontal VAS, 0 “no pain” to 10 “worst pain.” Differences in reported pain levels were compared with data from the previous cohort of 201 consecutive operative foot and ankle patients. Results: The mean VAS score reported to the nurse was 3.2 whereas the mean VAS score reported to the surgeon was 4.2 ( P < .001). The mean difference in VAS scores reported for operative patients was 2.9, whereas the mean difference for nonoperative patients was 1.0 ( P < .001). Conclusion: This study found statistically significant differences between VAS pain scores reported to the surgeon vs the nurse in nonoperative patients. These results support the trend found in our previous study, where operative patients reported significantly higher pain scores to the surgeon vs the nurse. The mean difference between reported pain scores was significantly higher for operative patients compared to nonoperative patients. Level of Evidence: Level III, comparative study.

Comparison of 2g vs 1 g of Prophylactic Cefazolin in Surgical Site Infections in Trauma Surgery Below the Knee

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (5) ◽  
pp. 582-589
Author(s):  
Fay R. K. Sanders ◽  
Rosanne M.G. Kistemaker ◽  
Mirjam van ’t Hul ◽  
Tim Schepers
Keyword(s):  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Clinical Effect ◽  
Trauma Surgery ◽  
Surgical Site Infections ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Studies ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Below The Knee ◽  
Ankle Surgery

Background: The rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) after foot or ankle surgery remains high, despite the implementation of antibiotic prophylaxis. Recently, guidelines suggest a single dose of 2 g instead of 1 g of cefazolin for implant surgery; this decision is largely based on pharmacokinetic studies. However, the clinical effect of this higher dose has never been investigated in foot and ankle surgery. This retrospective cohort study investigated the effect of 2 g compared with 1 g of prophylactic cefazolin on the incidence of SSIs in foot and ankle surgery. Methods: All patients undergoing trauma-related surgery of the foot, ankle, or lower leg between September 2015 and March 2019 were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of an SSI. SSIs were compared between patients receiving 1 g and 2 g of cefazolin as surgical prophylaxis, using a propensity score to correct for possible confounders. Results: A total of 293 patients received 1 g and 126 patients received 2 g of cefazolin. The overall number of SSIs was 19 (6.5%) in the 1-g group and 6 (4.8%) in the 2-g group. Corrected for possible confounders, this was not statistically significant (OR, 0.770; P = .608). Conclusion: Even though the decrease in SSI rate from 6.5% to 4.8% was found not to be statistically significant, it might be clinically relevant considering the reduction in morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Research linking pharmacokinetic and clinical results of prophylactic cefazolin is needed to establish whether or not the current recommendations and guidelines are sufficient for preventing SSIs in foot and ankle surgery. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative series.

Quality of Research and Level of Evidence in Foot and Ankle Publications

2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather L. Barske ◽  
Judith Baumhauer
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Medical Profession ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Ankle Surgery ◽  
Ankle Research ◽  
Level I ◽  
Quality Of Research

Background: The quality of research and evidence to support medical treatments is under scrutiny from the medical profession and the public. This study examined the current quality of research and level of evidence (LOE) of foot and ankle surgery papers published in orthopedic and podiatric medical journals. Methods: Two independent evaluators performed a blinded assessment of all foot and ankle clinical research articles (January 2010 to June 2010) from seven North American orthopedic and podiatric journals. JBJS-A grading system was used for LOE. Articles were assessed for indicators of study quality. The data was stratified by journal and medical credentials. Results: A total of 245 articles were published, 128 were excluded based on study design, leaving 117 clinical research articles. Seven (6%) were Level I, 14 (12%) Level II, 18 (15%) Level III, and 78 (67%) Level IV. The orthopedic journals published 78 studies on foot and ankle topics. Of the podiatric journals, the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association (JAPMA) published 12 clinical studies and the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery (JFAS) published 27, 21 (78%) of which were Level IV studies. When the quality of research was examined, few therapeutic studies used validated outcome measures and only 38 of 96 (40%) gathered data prospectively. Thirty (31%) studies used a comparison group. Eighty-seven articles (74%) were authored by a MD and 22 (19%) by a DPM. Conclusion: Foot & Ankle International (FAI) published higher quality studies with a higher LOE as compared to podiatry journals. Regardless of the journal, MDs produced the majority of published clinical foot and ankle research. Although improvements have been made in the quality of some clinical research, this study highlights the need for continued improvement in methodology within foot and ankle literature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document