Patient Satisfaction Reporting for the Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate how patient satisfaction after surgical femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) treatment is measured and reported in the current evidence base. METHODS: A review of the MEDLINE database was performed. Clinical outcome studies of FAI that reported a measure of patient satisfaction were included. Patient demographics, clinical outcome scores, and patient satisfaction measures were extracted. The NewCastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to grade quality. Statistical analysis was primarily descriptive. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies met inclusion criteria; the mean NOS score among included studies was 5.7. Most studies were level 3 or 4 (n = 25, 96.1%). A 0 to 10 numeric scale, described by some studies as a visual analog scale, was the most commonly used method to assess satisfaction (n = 21; 80.8%), and mean reported scores ranged from 6.8 to 9.2 out of 10. Four studies (15.4%) used an ordinal scale, and 1 study (3.8%) used willingness to undergo surgery again as the measure of satisfaction. None of the included studies assessed preoperative satisfaction or patient expectation. Pooled cohort analysis was limited by significant overlapping study populations. Predictors of patients' satisfaction identified in included studies were presence of arthritis and postoperative outcome scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction was not uniformly assessed in the literature. Most studies used a 0- to 10-point satisfaction scale, but none distinguished between the process of care and the outcome of care. Although satisfaction scores were generally high, the quality of the methodologies in the studies that reported satisfaction was low, and the studies likely included overlapping patient populations. More work needs to be done to develop standardized ways for assessing patient satisfaction after arthroscopic hip surgery and other procedures in orthopaedic sports medicine. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.128 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".