Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre

About: Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre is a healthcare organization based out in Oxford, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Arthroplasty. The organization has 2082 authors who have published 2920 publications receiving 145718 citations.

A mega-ethnography of eleven qualitative evidence syntheses exploring the experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain

Abstract: Each year over five million people develop chronic non-malignant pain and can experience healthcare as an adversarial struggle. The aims of this study were: (1) to bring together qualitative evidence syntheses that explore patients’ experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain and develop conceptual understanding of what it is like to live with chronic non-malignant pain for improved healthcare; (2) to undertake the first mega-ethnography of qualitative evidence syntheses using the methods of meta-ethnography. We used the seven stages of meta-ethnography refined for large studies. The innovation of mega-ethnography is to use conceptual findings from qualitative evidence syntheses as primary data. We searched 7 bibliographic databases from inception until February 2016 to identify qualitative evidence syntheses that explored patients’ experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain. We identified 82 potential studies from 556 titles, screened 34 full text articles and included 11 qualitative evidence syntheses synthesising a total of 187 qualitative studies reporting more than 5000 international participants living with chronic pain. We abstracted concepts into 7 conceptual categories: (1) my life is impoverished and confined; (2) struggling against my body to be me; (3) the quest for the diagnostic ‘holy grail’; (4) lost personal credibility; (5) trying to keep up appearances; (6) need to be treated with dignity; and (7) deciding to end the quest for the grail is not easy. Each conceptual category was supported by at least 7 of the 11 qualitative evidence syntheses. This is the first mega-ethnography, or synthesis of qualitative evidence syntheses using the methods of meta-ethnography. Findings help us to understand that the decision to end the quest for a diagnosis can leave patients feeling vulnerable and this may contribute to the adversarial nature of the clinical encounter. This knowledge demonstrates that treating a patient with a sense that they are worthy of care and hearing their story is not an adjunct to, but integral to health care.

The anterolateral approach leads to less disruption of the femoral head-neck blood supply than the posterior approach during hip resurfacing.

Abstract: In 12 patients, we measured the oxygen concentration in the femoral head-neck junction during hip resurfacing through the anterolateral approach. This was compared with previous measurements made for the posterior approach. For the anterolateral approach, the oxygen concentration was found to be highly dependent upon the position of the leg, which was adjusted during surgery to provide exposure to the acetabulum and femoral head. Gross external rotation of the hip gave a significant decrease in oxygenation of the femoral head. Straightening the limb led to recovery in oxygen concentration, indicating that the blood supply was maintained. The oxygen concentration at the end of the procedure was not significantly different from that at the start. The anterolateral approach appears to produce less disruption to the blood flow in the femoral head-neck junction than the posterior approach for patients undergoing hip resurfacing. This may be reflected subsequently in a lower incidence of fracture of the femoral neck and avascular necrosis.

DELTA2 guidance on choosing the target difference and undertaking and reporting the sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial

Abstract: Randomised controlled trials are considered to be the best method to assess comparative clinical efficacy and effectiveness, and can be a key source of data for estimating cost effectiveness. Central to the design of a randomised controlled trial is an a priori sample size calculation, which ensures that the study has a high probability of achieving its prespecified main objective. Beyond pure statistical or scientific concerns, it is ethically imperative that an appropriate number of study participants be recruited, to avoid imposing the burdens of a clinical trial on more patients than necessary. The scientific concern is satisfied and the ethical imperative is further addressed by the specification of a target difference between treatments that is considered realistic or important by one or more key stakeholder groups. The sample size calculation ensures that the trial will have the required statistical power to identify whether a difference of a particular magnitude exists. In this article, the key messages from the DELTA2 guidance on determining the target difference and sample size calculation for a randomised controlled trial are presented. Recommendations for the subsequent reporting of the sample size calculation are also provided.