The Fragility of Tourniquet Use in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Association Between Tourniquet Use and Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Comparison

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most commonly performed elective procedures in North America. While advancements have been made in patient optimization, surgical technique, and implant design, tourniquet use remains a contentious issue as it relates to patient outcomes and postoperative experience.

METHODS

As part of the PEPPER trial, we identified 5,684 patients who underwent primary TKA, of whom 4,866 (85.6%) underwent surgery with a tourniquet (the YT group) and 818 (14.4%) underwent surgery without a tourniquet (the NT group). The cohort was predominantly female (60.8%), White (77%), and of an ethnicity other than Hispanic or Latino (96.8%). The mean age of the patients was 64.6 ± 9.2 years. The primary outcomes were the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Joint Replacement (KOOS JR); Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health Summary (PROMIS-PH10); and numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), which were captured preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were length of stay, discharge disposition, analgesic consumption, and postoperative complications. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the associations between tourniquet use and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following TKA.

RESULTS

The percentages of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the KOOS JR were significantly different at 1 month only (YT, 55.4%; NT, 47.9%). This difference disappeared at 3 and 6 months. There was no difference between the YT and NT groups in terms of the percentage of patients achieving the MCID for the PROMIS-PH10 or NPRS at any time point. There were no differences between the YT and NT groups at any time point with respect to the KOOS JR, PROMIS-PH10, and NPRS. There were no differences in opioid consumption, operative time, length of stay, wound-related complications, or readmissions postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Tourniquet use was associated with more patients achieving the MCID for the KOOS JR at 1 month compared with no tourniquet use. This difference disappeared at 3 and 6 months. At 1, 3, and 6 months, there were no differences in opioid consumption, health-care utilization, or complications between patients undergoing TKA with a tourniquet versus without a tourniquet. Tourniquet use did not have a clinically meaningful impact on PROMs in the multivariable analysis. Arthroplasty surgeons may use these data during preoperative discussions with patients regarding tourniquet use as it relates to the surgeon's preference and how it could influence postoperative function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Fragility of Statistical Differences Between Surgical Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful treatment for hip osteoarthritis, but the optimal surgical approach for this procedure is a topic of debate. This review uses fragility analysis to determine the statistical fragility of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the 3 most common surgical approaches for THA: direct anterior, direct lateral, and posterior.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify RCTs comparing 2 of the 3 surgical approaches for THA. Dichotomous outcomes and study characteristics were extracted from each study that met the inclusion criteria. Fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) were calculated for each significant outcome (P≤.05), and reverse fragility index and quotient (rFI and FQ) were calculated for each nonsignificant outcome (P>.05).

RESULTS

Our search yielded 20 studies in total, with 146 identified dichotomous outcomes. In total, the outcomes had a median FI of 5 and a median rFI of 5. Significant outcomes that favored the anterior approach had a median FI of 6, and significant outcomes that favored the posterior or lateral approach both had a median FI of 1.

CONCLUSION

The RCTs comparing approaches to THA had a median FI of 5, signifying that the reversal of 5 events would be sufficient to change the significance of the entire outcome. This value is comparable to other FI values within the orthopedic literature, but subgroup analyses elucidated areas of greater statistical fragility, particularly in outcomes favoring either the lateral or posterior approach in THA. [Orthopedics. 2025;48(3):166-173.].

The Fragility of Statistical Findings Regarding Hemiarthroplasty Versus Total Hip Arthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures

There is debate over the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures with either hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty. This study aimed to evaluate the fragility index (FI) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these methods. We queried for these RCTs containing dichotomous outcomes, finding 11 RCTs with 63 dichotomous outcomes. The median FI for all outcomes was 6, signifying that 6 event reversals would change the statistical significance of an outcome. The median FI was 2 for significant outcomes and 6 for nonsignificant outcomes, indicating that outcomes favoring one surgical method are more statistically fragile than those demonstrating equivalency. [Orthopedics. 2025;48(2):69-73.].

The Statistical Fragility of Patellar Resurfacing in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating patellar resurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have conflicting findings, with some reporting its efficacy and others demonstrating no clinical significance. The fragility index (FI), reverse FI (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) evaluated statistical fragility of outcomes in RCTs evaluating patellar resurfacing in TKA.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were systematically searched for RCTs (January 1, 2000, to August 1, 2023) assessing patellar resurfacing in TKA. Of the 226 RCTs screened, 19 studies were included for analysis. We calculated FI and rFI, which represent the number of outcome event reversals required to alter statistical significance for significant and nonsignificant outcomes, respectively. The outcome categories of interest included anterior knee pain, complications/adverse events, crepitus, reoperation, patient satisfaction, and clinical improvement. The FQ was determined by dividing the FI by the study sample size.

RESULTS

Across 46 outcomes, the median FI was 5 (interquartile range (IQR) 3 to 8) with a median FQ of 0.041 (IQR 0.025 to 0.063). There were nine outcomes that were statistically significant, with a median FI of 3 (IQR 2 to 8) and a FQ of 0.011 (IQR 0.0044 to 0.039). There were 37 outcomes that were nonsignificant, with a median rFI of 5 (IQR 4 to 7) and FQ of 0.043 (IQR 0.031 to 0.062). Notably, in 47.8% of all outcomes, the number of patients lost to follow-up was greater than the outcome's respective FI or rFI. Outcomes regarding patient satisfaction (FI 4.5) and anterior knee pain (FI 5) were most fragile.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes of interest regarding patellar resurfacing from RCTs are statistically fragile, particularly significant outcomes and patient satisfaction outcomes. Data surrounding patellar resurfacing remain inconclusive, and combining P values with FI/FQ metrics may aid in interpreting patellar resurfacing findings. Future studies may mitigate fragility by obtaining higher follow-up rates and sample sizes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Fragility Index Analysis of the 2018 Clinical Practice Guidelines on Tranexamic Acid Use in Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The 2018 American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons clinical practice guideline (CPG) 'tranexamic acid use in total joint arthroplasty' evaluated the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in primary total joint arthroplasty. The following review assessed the statistical fragility of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) outcomes on which the CPG recommendations were based using a fragility analysis.

METHODS

All dichotomous outcomes from the RCTs used to guide the CPG from its associated network, and direct meta-analyses were analyzed. Fragility and reverse fragility indices (FI and rFI) and quotients were calculated for each outcome. The mean indices and quotients were calculated for each guideline question, outcome category, and comparison of tranexamic dose, formulation, and administration timing.

RESULTS

This review evaluated 403 dichotomous outcomes on transfusion and complication rates associated with tranexamic acid (TXA) administration. The mean FI of significant outcomes of the CPG was 5.23, and the mean rFI of nonsignificant outcomes was 5.80. Outcomes assessing complication rates had a mean rFI of 6.48. Most outcomes on transfusion in categories comparing TXA to placebo administration had higher mean FIs than rFIs, and all outcomes comparing transfusion risk associated with different TXA formulations and doses had higher mean rFIs than FI or no associated significant outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The rFI and FIs calculated for this CPG are comparable to or higher than mean values reported across orthopaedic literature, indicating the relative statistical stability of its included outcomes. As we learn more about fragility analyses and their potential applications, this type of statistical analysis shows promise as a useful tool to incorporate into future guidelines to assess the quality of RCTs and evaluate the strength of recommendations.

The statistical stability of clavicle fracture management: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials with fragility analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the highest level of evidence in guiding the management of clavicle fractures. They are conducted to ensure that evidence drives the basis of treatment algorithms. Relying solely on P values to assess orthopedic RCTs may be deceptive and challenge the validity of the studies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the degree of statistical fragility in the clavicle fracture literature using the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ).

METHODS

A systematic search strategy using the Medline, PubMed, and Embase databases was used to find all dichotomous data for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in clavicle fracture research from 2000 to 2024. The FI of each outcome was calculated by reversing a single outcome event until significance was reversed. The FQ was calculated by dividing each fragility index by the study sample size. The interquartile range (IQR) was also calculated for the FI and FQ.

RESULTS

Of the 3646 articles screened, 81 met the search criteria, with 30 RCTs evaluating clavicle fractures included for analysis. There were 250 total outcomes, where 62 significant and 188 nonsignificant outcomes were identified. The overall FI and FQ were 4 (IQR 3-5) and 0.045 (IQR 0.024-0.080). Statistically significant and nonsignificant outcomes had an FI of 3.5 (IQR 2-7) and 4 (IQR 3-5), respectively. Regarding loss to follow-up (LTF), 63.3% (19) reported LTF greater or equal to the overall FI of 4.

CONCLUSION

When scrutinizing management algorithms relying on statistical analysis, we recommend including the FI and FQ alongside the P value.

The Statistical Fragility of Marrow Stimulation for Cartilage Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Marrow stimulation is used to address knee cartilage defects. In this study, we used the fragility index (FI), reverse fragility index (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) to evaluate statistical fragility of outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating marrow stimulation.

DESIGN

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE were queried for recent RCTs (January 1, 2010-September 5, 2023) assessing marrow stimulation for cartilage defects of the knee. The FI and rFI were calculated as the number of outcome event reversals required to alter statistical significance for significant and nonsignificant outcomes, respectively. The FQ was determined by dividing the FI by the study sample size.

RESULTS

Across 155 total outcomes from 21 RCTs, the median FI was 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 2-5), with an associated median FQ of 0.067 (IQR, 0.033-0.010). Thirty-two outcomes were statistically significant, with a median FI of 2 (IQR, 1-3.25) and FQ of 0.050 (IQR, 0.025-0.069). Ten of the 32 (31.3%) outcomes reported as statistically significant had an FI of 1. In total, 123 outcomes were nonsignificant, with a median rFI of 3 (IQR, 2-5). Studies assessing stem cell augments were the most fragile, with a median FI of 2. In 55.5% of outcomes, the number of patients lost to follow-up was greater than or equal to the FI.

CONCLUSION

Statistical findings in RCTs evaluating marrow stimulation for cartilage defects of the knee are statistically fragile. We recommend combined reporting of P-values with FI and FQ metrics to aid in the interpretation of clinical findings in comparative trials assessing cartilage restoration.

Fragility in cardiovascular randomized controlled trials with primary continuous outcomes (2018-2022) from multi-perspectives assessment: a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the robustness of cardiovascular disease randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with primary continuous outcomes from a clinical perspective, utilizing the concepts of continuous fragility index (CFI), reverse continuous fragility index (RCFI) and their corresponding quotients (CFQ, RCFQ).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted, searching PubMed for cardiovascular RCTs published between January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2022, in eight high-impact journals. Inclusion criteria were phase III or IV trials with 1:1 randomization, reporting at least one primary continuous outcome. Data analysis involved altering each outcome until achieving the reversal of significance (ɑ = 0.05) to determine the CFI or RCFI. The fragility quotients were then calculated by dividing the CFI or RCFI by the sample size, and Spearman's correlation assessed correlation analyses.

RESULTS

Of 3983 records were screened, and 64 RCTs (76 outcomes) were included. The fragility index was analysed with 72 outcomes. The overall median CFI was 7, with an associated median CFQ of 0.032. Nonsignificant P values exhibited greater statistical instability (median RCFI = 5, RCFQ = 0.023) than significant P values (median CFI = 14, CFQ = 0.062). Interestingly, "fragile" values were found in 36% (9/25) of CFI or 46.7% (7/15) of RCFI. Additionally, fragility index showed a significant association with several variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that changing only a small number of interventions (median of 7) could alter outcome significance. Reporting the fragility index alongside P values is recommended to provide a clearer understanding of statistical findings' robustness.HighlightsThe continuous fragility index (CFI) represents the minimum patient count needed to modify significance by altering their intervention.Among 72 primary continuous outcomes in 64 cardiovascular RCTs, the overall median CFI was 7, with a corresponding CFQ of 0.032.CFI demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with sample size, total dropouts, and patient numbers analyzed.

The fragility of statistical findings in the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty literature: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has seen increasing utilization as an effective intervention for a wide variety of shoulder pathologies. The scope and indications for growth are often driven by findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) guiding surgical decision-making for RTSA. In this study, we utilized the fragility index (FI), reverse fragility index (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) to assess the robustness of outcomes reported in RCTs in the RTSA literature.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE were queried for RCTs (Jan. 1, 2010-Mar. 31, 2023) in the RTSA literature reporting dichotomous outcomes. The FI and rFI were defined as the number of outcome reversals required to alter statistical significance for significant and nonsignificant outcomes, respectively. The FQ was determined by dividing the FI by the sample size of each study. Subgroup analysis was performed based on outcome category.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-six RCTs were screened with 18 studies included. The median FI across 59 total outcomes was 4 (interquartile range [IQR]: 3-5) with an associated FQ of 0.051 (IQR: 0.029-0.065). Thirteen outcomes were statistically significant with a median FI of 3 (IQR: 1-4) and FQ of 0.033 (IQR: 0.012-0.066). Forty-six outcomes were nonsignificant with a median rFI of 4 (IQR: 3-5) and FQ of 0.055 (IQR: 0.032-0.065). The most fragile outcome category was revision/reoperations with a median FI of 2.50 (IQR: 1.00-3.25), followed by clinical score/outcome (median FI: 3.00), complications (median FI: 4.00), "other" (median FI: 4.00), and radiographic findings (median FI: 5.00). Notably, the number of patients lost to follow-up was greater than or equal to the FI for 59% of outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The statistical findings in RTSA RCTs are fragile and should be interpreted with caution. Reversal of only a few outcomes, or maintaining postoperative follow-up, may be sufficient to alter significance of study findings. We recommend standardized reporting of P values with FI and FQ metrics to allow clinicians to effectively assess the robustness of study findings.

Interpreting the Current Literature on Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Versus Conventional Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Fragility Analysis: A Systematic Review and Cross-Sectional Study of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Fragility analysis is a method of further characterizing outcomes in terms of the stability of statistical findings. This study assesses the statistical fragility of recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating robotic-assisted versus conventional total knee arthroplasty (RA-TKA versus C-TKA).

METHODS

We queried PubMed for RCTs comparing alignment, function, and outcomes between RA-TKA and C-TKA. Fragility index (FI) and reverse fragility index (RFI) (collectively, "FI") were calculated for dichotomous outcomes as the number of outcome reversals needed to change statistical significance. Fragility quotient (FQ) was calculated by dividing the FI by the sample size for that outcome event. Median FI and FQ were calculated for all outcomes collectively as well as for each individual outcome. Subanalyses were performed to assess FI and FQ based on outcome event type and statistical significance, as well as study loss to follow-up and year of publication.

RESULTS

The overall median FI was 3.0 (interquartile range, [IQR] 1.0 to 6.3) and the median reverse fragility index was 3.0 (IQR 2.0 to 4.0). The overall median FQ was 0.027 (IQR 0.012 to 0.050). Loss to follow-up was greater than FI for 23 of the 38 outcomes assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

A small number of alternative outcomes is often enough to reverse the statistical significance of findings in RCTs evaluating dichotomous outcomes in RA-TKA versus C-TKA. We recommend reporting FI and FQ alongside P values to improve the interpretability of RCT results.

The Fragility of Statistical Findings in the Femoral Neck Fracture Literature: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the femoral neck fracture literature frequently report P -values for outcomes, which have substantial implications in guiding surgical management. This study used the fragility index (FI), reverse fragility index (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) to assess the statistical stability of outcomes reported in RCTs evaluating the management and treatment of femoral neck fractures.

METHODS

DATA SOURCES

DESIGN

PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE were queried for RCTs (January 1, 2010 to February 28, 2023).

SETTING

RCTs that evaluated surgical management or treatment of femoral neck fractures were included.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs with 2 treatment arms reporting categorical dichotomous outcomes were included. Non-RCT studies, RCTs with greater than 2 treatment arms, and RCTs without a femoral neck fracture cohort were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

The FI and rFI were calculated as the number of outcome event reversals required to alter statistical significance for significant ( P < 0.05) and nonsignificant ( P ≥ 0.05) outcomes, respectively. The FQ was calculated by dividing the FI by the sample size for the study.

RESULTS

Nine hundred eighty-five articles were screened, with 71 studies included for analysis. The median FI across a total of 197 outcomes was 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-5] with an associated FQ of 0.033 (IQR 0.017-0.060). Forty-seven outcomes were statistically significant with a median FI of 2 (IQR 1-4) and associated FQ of 0.02 (IQR 0.014-0.043). One hundred fifty outcomes were statistically nonsignificant with a median rFI of 4 (IQR 3-5) and associated FQ of 0.037 (IQR 0.019-0.065).

CONCLUSIONS

Statistical findings in femoral neck fracture RCTs are fragile, with reversal of a median 4 outcomes altering significance of study findings. The authors thus recommend standardized reporting of P -values with FI and FQ metrics to aid in interpreting the robustness of outcomes in femoral neck fracture RCTs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Fragility of Statistical Findings in Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: a Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

This study employs both the fragility index (FI) and fragility quotient (FQ) to assess the level of robustness in the cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) literature. We hypothesize that dichotomous outcomes involving CDA would exhibit statistical vulnerability.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted to evaluate dichotomous data for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in CDA literature from 2000 to 2023. The FI of each outcome was calculated through the reversal of a single outcome event until significance was reversed. The FQ was calculated by dividing each fragility index by the study sample size. The interquartile range (IQR) was also calculated for the FI and FQ.

RESULTS

Of the 1561 articles screened, 111 met the search criteria, with 35 RCTs evaluating CDA included for analysis. Six hundred and ninety-three outcome events with 130 significant (P < 0.05) outcomes and 563 nonsignificant (P ≥ 0.05) outcomes were identified. The overall FI and FQ for all 693 outcomes were 5 (IQR 3-7) and 0.019 (IQR 0.011-0.043). Fragility analysis of statistically significant outcomes and nonsignificant outcomes both revealed an FI of 5. All of the studies reported loss to follow-up (LTF) data where 65.7% (23) did not report or reported an LTF greater or equal to 5.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature regarding CDA RCTs lacks statistical robustness and may misrepresent the conclusions with the sole use of the P value. By implementing the FI and FQ along with the P value, we believe the interpretation and contextualization of the clinical data surrounding CDA will be better understood.

Statistical fragility of outcomes in acellular dermal matrix literature: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is commonly used in plastic and reconstructive surgery. With the abundance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting P-values for ADM outcomes, this study used the fragility index (FI), reverse fragility index (rFI), and fragility quotient (FQ) to evaluate the statistical stability of the outcomes in ADM RCTs.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Medline, and Cochrane databases were reviewed for ADM RCTs (2003-present) reporting a dichotomous, categorical outcome. FI and rFI (event reversals influencing outcome significance) and FQ (standardized fragility) were calculated and reported as median. Subgroup analysis was performed based on intervention types.

RESULTS

Among the 127 studies screened, 56 RCTs with 579 outcomes were included. The median FI stood at 4 (3-5) and FQ was 0.04 (0.03-0.07). Only 101 outcomes were statistically significant with a median FI of 3 (1-6) and FQ of 0.04 (0.02-0.08). The nonsignificant outcomes had a median FI of 4 (3-5) and FQ of 0.04 (0.03-0.07). Notably, 26% of the outcomes had several patients lost to follow up equal to or surpassing the FI. Based on the intervention type, the median FIs showed minor fluctuations but remained low.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes from ADM-related RCTs were statistically fragile. Slight outcome reversals or maintenance of patient follow-up can alter the significance of results. Therefore, future researchers are recommended to jointly report FI, FQ, and P-values to offer a comprehensive view of the robustness in ADM literature.

Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Versus Hamstring Tendon Autografts in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery Are Statistically Fragile: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To assess the statistical fragility of recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of hamstring tendon autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were queried for RCTs published since 2010 comparing autograft type (bone-patellar tendon-bone vs hamstring tendon) in ACL reconstruction surgery. The fragility index (FI) and reverse FI (rFI) were determined for significant and nonsignificant outcomes, respectively, as the number of outcome reversals required to change statistical significance. The fragility quotient (FQ) and reverse FQ, representing fragility as a proportion of the study population, were calculated by dividing the FI and rFI, respectively, by the sample size.

RESULTS

We identified 19 RCTs reporting 55 total dichotomous outcomes. The median FI of the 55 total outcomes was 5 (interquartile range [IQR], 4-7), meaning a median of 5 outcome event reversals would alter the outcomes' significance. Five outcomes were reported as statistically significant with a median FI of 4 (IQR, 2-6), meaning a median of 4 outcome event reversals would change outcomes to be nonsignificant. Fifty outcomes were reported as nonsignificant with a median rFI of 5 (IQR, 4-7), meaning a median of 5 outcome event reversals would change outcomes to be significant. The FQ and reverse FQ for significant and nonsignificant outcomes were 0.025 (IQR, 0.018-0.045) and 0.082 (IQR, 0.041-0.106), respectively. For 61.8% of outcomes, patients lost to follow-up exceeded the corresponding FI or rFI.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial statistical fragility in recent RCTs on autograft choice in ACL reconstruction surgery given that altering a few outcome events is sufficient to reverse study findings. For over half of outcomes, maintaining patients lost to follow-up may have been sufficient to reverse study conclusions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

We recommend co-reporting FIs and P values to provide a more comprehensive representation of a study's conclusions when conducting an RCT.

The Statistical Fragility of Orbital Fractures: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The P value has often been used as a tool to determine the statistical significance and evaluate the statistical robustness of study findings in orthopedic literature. The purpose of this study is to apply both the fragility index (FI) and the fragility quotient (FQ) to evaluate the degree of statistical fragility in orbital fracture literature. We hypothesized that the dichotomous outcomes within the orbital fracture literature will be vulnerable to a small number of outcome event reversals and will be statistically fragile.

METHODS

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), the authors identified all dichotomous data for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in orbital fracture literature and performed a PubMed search from 2000 to 2022. The FI of each outcome was calculated through the reversal of a single outcome event until significance was reversed. The FQ was calculated by dividing each FI by study sample size. The interquartile range (IQR) was also calculated for the FI and FQ.

RESULTS

Of the 3,329 studies screened, 28 met the criteria with 10 RCTs evaluating orbital fractures included for analysis. A total of 58 outcome events with 22 significant (P < .05) outcomes and 36 nonsignificant (P ≥ .05) outcomes were identified. The overall FI and FQ for all 58 outcomes was 5 (IQR: 4 to 5) and 0.140 (IQR: 0.075 to 0.250), respectively. Fragility analysis of statistical significant outcomes and nonsignificant outcomes had an FI of 3.5 with no IQR and 5 (IQR 4-5), respectively. All of the studies reported a loss to follow-up data, where 20% (2) was greater than the overall FI of 5.

CONCLUSION

The orbital fracture literature provides treatment guidance by relying on statistical significant results from RCTs. However, the RCTs in the orbital fracture peer-reviewed literature may not be statistically stable as previously thought. The sole reliance of the P value may depict misleading results. Thus, we recommend standardizing the reporting of the P value, FI, and FQ in the orbital fracture literature to aid readers in reliably drawing conclusions based on fragility outcome measures impacting clinical decision-making.