RESUMEN
Introduction: Three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has been used in orthopaedic surgery in recent years to manufacture customized surgical cutting jigs. However, there is scarcity of literature and information regarding the optimal parameters of an ideal jig. Our study aims to determine the optimum parameters to design surgical jigs that can produce accurate cuts, and remain practical for use, to serve as a guide for jig creation in future. Methods and materials: A biomechanical lab study was designed to investigate whether the thickness of a jig and the height of its cutting slot can significantly affect cutting accuracy. Surgical jigs were 3D printed in medical grade, and an oscillating sawblade was used to mimic intraoperative surgical cuts through the cutting slots onto wooden blocks, which were then analysed to determine the accuracy of cuts. Results: Statistical analysis was performed on a total of 72 cuts. The cutting accuracy increased when the thickness of the jig increased, at all slot heights. The cutting accuracy also increased as the slot height decreased, at all jig thicknesses. Overall, the parameters for jig construction that yielded the most accurate cuts were a jig thickness of 15 mm, in combination with a slot height of 100 % of the width of the sawblade. Additionally, at a jig thickness of 15 mm, there was no statistically significant difference in cutting accuracy when increasing the slot height to 120 %. Conclusion: This study is the first to propose tangible parameters that can be applied to surgical jig construction to obtain reproducible accurate cuts. Provided that a jig of 15 mm thickness can be accommodated by the size of the wound, the ideal surgical jig with a superior balance of accuracy and useability is 15 mm thick, with a cutting slot height of 120 % of the sawblade thickness.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We performed a systematic review of patient and public involvement in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of orthopaedic surgery. We assessed the prevalence, extent, and quality of patient and public involvement (PPI) in current academic orthopaedic practice. METHODS: A literature search of the Cochrane, MEDLINE, and Embase databases was performed; we identified RCTs that were published between 2013 and 2020 in the 10 orthopaedic surgery journals with the highest impact factors. Inclusion of studies was based on set criteria, and they were analyzed for their validity. The results were assessed for the rate and the quality of PPI reporting. The Wright and Foster guidelines and the GRIPP2-SF (Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public-2 short form) checklist were used to assess PPI reporting. This review was reported in line with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: An initial 2,107 results were identified. After the screening process, 475 full-text articles were identified and reviewed. Two papers that described PPI were included in this review. One paper used PPI to inform the research question, the choice of primary outcome, the oversight of the study schedule, and the dissemination of the results. The second article used PPI to design the study protocol. Both articles poorly reported the impact of PPI on the research. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this systematic review is the first to describe the prevalence, extent, and quality of PPI reporting in orthopaedic RCTs. Barriers to adequate PPI reporting are multifactorial and stem from a lack of systematic uptake of PPI guidelines and a lack of compulsory PPI reporting from publishing bodies. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: PPI can improve the quality of clinical trials by focusing on the clinical questions and outcomes that are most important to patients. This article assesses the prevalence of PPI reporting in orthopaedic RCTs.
