Publishing Characteristics of Foot and Ankle Research Over a 15-Year Time Interval: A Review of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery from 2004 to 2018

How Much Does a Computed Tomography-Based Mixed-Reality Navigation System Change Freehand Acetabular Component Position?

Background

This study evaluates how a computed tomography-based mixed-reality (MR) navigation system impacts acetabular component orientation compared to freehand positioning in total hip arthroplasty.

Methods

A series of 79 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty utilizing a computed tomography-based MR navigation system were reviewed. The surgeon initially placed the acetabular cup freehand, attempting to achieve the preoperative plan, and this initial intraoperative orientation was recorded. The cup was then adjusted to the planned position. The difference between freehand and planned tilt-adjusted operative anteversion (OA) and inclination (OI) determined the navigation tool's impact.

Results

The mean preoperative planned OA was 30.1 ± 2.0 (range: 25, 35) degrees, and the mean freehand intraoperative OA was 30.2 ± 9.1 (range: 4, 57) degrees (P = .885), requiring a mean adjustment of 6.8 ± 5.1 (range: 0, 23) degrees. Freehand OA was corrected at least 5 degrees in 54.4% (43/79) of cases. The mean preoperative planned OI was 40.8 ± 0.6 (range: 39, 42) degrees, and the mean freehand intraoperative OI was 37.8 ± 6.6 (range: 18, 53) degrees (P < .001), requiring a mean adjustment of 5.7 ± 4.5 (range: 0, 22) degrees to achieve. Freehand OI was corrected at least 5 degrees in 43.0% (34/79) of cases.

Conclusions

Freehand acetabular component positioning in the lateral position is variable when attempting to execute patient-specific numerical cup orientation targets. Use of this navigation tool led the surgeon to correct more than 5 degrees in both OA and OI in roughly half of the hips.

A 15-Year Bibliometric Analysis of Sports Medicine Studies in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery: A Systematic Review

Background

Orthopaedic sports medicine is among the most popular subspecialties. Understanding the trends in sports medicine research over time can offer insight into progress and innovation within the field. The purpose of this study was to assess both the quality of the current literature and trends in gender diversity and inclusion by evaluating publishing characteristics of sports medicine studies in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume (JBJS-A) from 2007 to 2021.

Methods

Sports medicine studies in JBJS-A from 2007 to 2021 were identified using JBJS subspeciality tags for "sports medicine" articles and organized by study type, number of authors, sex of the authors, academic degree(s) of the first and last authors, level of evidence, country of publication, citations, and use of patient-reported outcomes (PROM).

Results

A total of 784 studies were reviewed, and 513 met inclusion criteria. Clinical therapeutic studies were the most common publication (48%). There was an increase in the publication of clinical prognostic studies (17%-25%, p = 0.037) and a significant increase in the use of PROM measures over time (13%-47%, p < 0.001). The total number of authors increased over the study period (4.8-6.3), but there was no significant increase in female authorship. Only 15% of the 784 studies included a female author, with an average of 0.8 female authors per article (range 0-8) compared with 4.6 males (range 1-14).

Conclusion

The significant increase in the use of PROMs in sports medicine studies indicates that the quality of research has improved over the 15-year period. The gender disparity in authorship has remained stagnant. Only 11% of all first authors and 9% of senior authors were female. The number of included international studies improved over time; however, the United States remains the most prolific publisher. Despite these areas of growth, this study suggests that there is room for improvement of authorship gender diversity in orthopaedic sports medicine research.

Level of Evidence

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

How international are the editorial boards in the field of foot and ankle surgery?: A STROBE-compliant cross-sectional study

Very low proportions of publications from low- and middle-income countries (LAMIC) have been proved in multiple fields. Some researchers from these countries believe that there is a biased attitude of editors against their studies. Under-representation of editorial board members from LAMIC were revealed in many research fields. However, it has not been investigated in the field of foot and ankle surgery. The current study aimed to analyze the composition of the editorial board members in leading foot and ankle journals, and to provide the international representation of editorial boards in the field of foot and ankle surgery. Five leading journals in the field of foot and ankle surgery were included. The editorial board members were collected from the official websites of these journals. The countries of board members were classified based on World Bank. The board compositions of the journals were analyzed. In total, 229 editorial board members were identified. These editors were from 29 countries. The United States (29.69%) had the greatest number of editors, followed by the United Kingdom (20.52%), Australia (8.30%), Italy (6.11%), and Germany (5.68%). When the editors were classified by regions, 49.34% of board members were from Europe & Central Asia, followed by North America (31.44%), East Asia & Pacific (14.41%), Latin America & Caribbean (2.62%), and Middle East & North Africa (2.18%). No editors were from South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. A total of 217 editors (94.76%) were from high-income countries, followed by upper-middle-income countries (3.06%), and lower-middle-income countries (2.18%). No members were from low-income countries. There is a lack of international representation on editorial boards of leading foot and ankle journals. Editorial board members in the field of foot and ankle surgery are largely composed by editors from high-income countries with sever under-representation of LAMIC.

Significant increase in quantity and quality of knee arthroplasty related research in KSSTA over the past 15 years

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate both publication and authorship characteristics in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy journal (KSSTA) regarding knee arthroplasty over the past 15 years.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles published in KSSTA between January 1, 2006, and December 31st, 2020, utilising the search term 'knee arthroplasty'. 1288 articles met the inclusion criteria. The articles were evaluated using the following criteria: type of article, type of study, main topic and special topic, use of patient-reported outcome scores, number of references and citations, level of evidence (LOE), number of authors, gender of the first author and continent of origin. Three time intervals were compared: 2006-2010, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020.

RESULTS

Between 2016 and 2020, publications peaked at 670 articles (52%) compared with 465 (36%) published between 2011 and 2016 and 153 articles (12%) between 2006 and 2010. While percentage of reviews (2006-2010: 0% vs. 2011-2015: 5% vs. 2016-2020: 5%) and meta-analyses (1% vs. 6% vs. 5%) increased, fewer case reports were published (13% vs. 3% vs. 1%) (p < 0.001). Interest in navigation and computer-assisted surgery decreased, whereas interest in perioperative management, robotic and individualized surgery increased over time (p < 0.001). There was an increasing number of references [26 (2-73) vs. 30 (2-158) vs. 31 (1-143), p < 0.001] while number of citations decreased [30 (0-188) vs. 22 (0-264) vs. 6 (0-106), p < 0.001]. LOE showed no significant changes (p = 0.439). The number of authors increased between each time interval (p < 0.001), while the percentage of female authors was comparable between first and last interval (p = 0.252). Europe published significantly fewer articles over time (56% vs. 47% vs. 52%), whereas the number of articles from Asia increased (35% vs. 45% vs. 37%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Increasing interest in the field of knee arthroplasty-related surgery arose within the last 15 years in KSSTA. The investigated topics showed a significant trend towards the latest techniques at each time interval. With rising number of authors, the part of female first authors also increased-but not significantly. Furthermore, publishing characteristics showed an increasing number of publications from Asia and a slightly decreasing number in Europe.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Bibliometric Analysis of the English Musculoskeletal Literature over the Last 30 Years

Publication and authorship are important in academia for career advancement, obtaining grants, and improved patient care. There has been a recent interest in bibliometric changes over time, especially regarding the gender gap. The purpose of this study was to explore bibliometric changes in the musculoskeletal literature. Bibliometric variables (number of authors, institutions, countries, pages, references, corresponding author position, author gender, geographic region of origin, and editorial board makeup) were analyzed for 5 basic science and 12 clinically oriented musculoskeletal journals from 1985 through 2016. Statistical analyses comprised bivariate analyses, multifactorial ANOVAs, and logistic regression analyses. A p < 0.005 was considered significant. Nearly, all variables increased over time. Asia had the highest number of authors and corresponding author positions, Australia/New Zealand the highest number of institutions and references, North America the highest number of pages, and Europe the highest number of countries. Those with a female first author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Likewise, those with a female corresponding author had more authors, institutions, countries, references, and pages. Single-authored manuscripts decreased over time. The percentage of female first authors rose from 10.8% in 1985-1987 to 23.7% in 2015-2016. There were more female 1^st authors in the basic science journals compared to the clinical journals (33.2% vs. 12.7%). Single-authored manuscripts were more likely to be written by males (5.1 vs. 2.4%) and decreased over time. The many differences by geographic region of origin likely reflect different socio/cultural attitudes regarding academia and research, as well as the gender composition of the disciplines by geographic region. Overall, there has been an increase in the number of female 1^st and corresponding authors, editorial board members, and chief editors, indicating a slow but progressive narrowing of the gender gap.