MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284958362 · doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10614

Preoperative Patient Education Programs for Orthopaedic Surgery: What Do the Programs Include? How Are They Delivered? What Are the Knowledge Gaps? A Scoping Review of 46 Studies

2022· review· en· W4284958362 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rochelle Furtado, Joy C. MacDermid, Christina Ziebart, Dianne Bryant, Kenneth J. Faber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To (1) describe the nature and content of the current literature on preoperative education programs for patients preparing for orthopaedic surgery, (2) assess the completeness of reporting program descriptions, and (3) report gaps within the literature. DESIGN: Scoping review. LITERATURE SEARCH: We searched the CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Reviews, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases for studies that (1) addressed preoperative education in elective orthopaedic surgery or (2) provided descriptions or evaluations of a preoperative program, including the content or outcomes of the program. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles were included if they addressed preoperative patient education focused on an elective orthopaedic surgery and any of the (1) descriptions of an education program including any theoretical frameworks, content, or delivery, or (2) evaluations of the process of a preoperative educational program. Studies were excluded if they were treatment programs with the goal of resolving the problem occurring prior to surgery (eg, rehabilitation or pain management prior to surgery). DATA SYNTHESIS: We used the template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide to assess the completeness of reporting of the content of educational programs. Content was synthesized descriptively and by intervention mapping. The results informed of a draft operational definition of preoperative education that we refined based on expert consultation. RESULTS: Forty-six articles were included. There was variation in study designs, target populations, and intervention content. Preoperative education was defined in 1 out of 5 studies. Thirteen studies used a platform of video-based modules to deliver their program; 3 studies implemented virtual platforms. Results from the TIDieR checklist indicated that 30% of studies tracked adherence to and fidelity of their programs. A definition and conceptual map indicated that the length of stay, functional abilities, patient knowledge, and satisfaction were expected benefits. CONCLUSION: .

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical TherapySame topicMusic Therapy and HealthFrench-language works237,207