Diverse Views and Practices on the Handling of Explanted Hardware Highlights the Need for Standardized Management.

IF 1.8 2区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Orthopaedic Surgery Pub Date : 2024-12-30 DOI:10.1111/os.14327
Ali Engin Daştan, Arman Vahabi, Hüseyin Günay, Kemal Aktuğlu
{"title":"Diverse Views and Practices on the Handling of Explanted Hardware Highlights the Need for Standardized Management.","authors":"Ali Engin Daştan, Arman Vahabi, Hüseyin Günay, Kemal Aktuğlu","doi":"10.1111/os.14327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Orthopedic implants may need to be removed for various reasons. There is little data on the appropriate handling of implants after their removal from patients. This study aimed to analyze how orthopedic surgeons handle removed implants and their underlying philosophies, using data collected from a survey.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study, conducted between May 2024 and June 2024, utilized an online survey targeting orthopedic surgeons and residents in Turkey to investigate practices and views regarding removed implants. A total of 205 participants completed an 11-question online survey via Google Forms. The survey covered hospital types, professional experience, protocols for handling removed implants, practices for archiving and disposing of implants, and perspectives on current practices and future direction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants' professional experience varied widely. None of the participants followed a specific protocol for managing removed implants. Opinions on giving implants to patients were diverse: 17.1% would never give the implant to the patient, 32.2% would comply with the patient's request, and 50.7% had no definitive approach. A minority (2.9%) systematically archived implants, while others archived selectively or disposed of them as medical waste. The primary motivations for archiving included medicolegal protection (21%) and professional curiosity (75.2%). Only 2.9% had experience with legal requests for removed implants, and 80% supported establishing regulations for handling removed implants.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Orthopedic surgeons' legal and ethical perceptions regarding removed implants, as well as their preference of handling, vary widely. Establishing a standardized approach can reduce this variability in practice and ensure uniformity in healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":19566,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14327","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Orthopedic implants may need to be removed for various reasons. There is little data on the appropriate handling of implants after their removal from patients. This study aimed to analyze how orthopedic surgeons handle removed implants and their underlying philosophies, using data collected from a survey.

Methods: This study, conducted between May 2024 and June 2024, utilized an online survey targeting orthopedic surgeons and residents in Turkey to investigate practices and views regarding removed implants. A total of 205 participants completed an 11-question online survey via Google Forms. The survey covered hospital types, professional experience, protocols for handling removed implants, practices for archiving and disposing of implants, and perspectives on current practices and future direction.

Results: Participants' professional experience varied widely. None of the participants followed a specific protocol for managing removed implants. Opinions on giving implants to patients were diverse: 17.1% would never give the implant to the patient, 32.2% would comply with the patient's request, and 50.7% had no definitive approach. A minority (2.9%) systematically archived implants, while others archived selectively or disposed of them as medical waste. The primary motivations for archiving included medicolegal protection (21%) and professional curiosity (75.2%). Only 2.9% had experience with legal requests for removed implants, and 80% supported establishing regulations for handling removed implants.

Discussion: Orthopedic surgeons' legal and ethical perceptions regarding removed implants, as well as their preference of handling, vary widely. Establishing a standardized approach can reduce this variability in practice and ensure uniformity in healthcare.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Orthopaedic Surgery
Orthopaedic Surgery ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
374
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopaedic Surgery (OS) is the official journal of the Chinese Orthopaedic Association, focusing on all aspects of orthopaedic technique and surgery. The journal publishes peer-reviewed articles in the following categories: Original Articles, Clinical Articles, Review Articles, Guidelines, Editorials, Commentaries, Surgical Techniques, Case Reports and Meeting Reports.
期刊最新文献
Diverse Views and Practices on the Handling of Explanted Hardware Highlights the Need for Standardized Management. Popliteal Artery Injury After Arthroscopic Knee Surgery: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study. Clinical Study on the Effects of Total Hip Arthroplasty Assisted by Virtual Planning Combined With Intraoperative Navigation Templates. Freehand Placement of a Transiliac-Transsacral Screw for Fixation of Posterior Pelvic Ring Injuries. The Health-Related Quality of Life for Cemented Versus Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty in Elderly Patients With Femoral Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1