Successful Management of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Joint Arthroplasty, as Defined by the Patient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The literature on the subjective experience of patients undergoing treatment for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is scarce, and treatment success is defined without consideration of patient values. The primary objective of this study was to characterize the experience of patients undergoing PJI management. The secondary and tertiary aims were to identify factors that patients associate with successful treatment and to assess alignment with a 2019 outcome-reporting tool (ORT) by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS). METHODS: Patients treated for PJI at 2 international tertiary arthroplasty centers and for whom no less than 1 year and no more than 5 years had elapsed since their most recent revision surgery were included. From August 2023 to April 2024, patients participated in semistructured interviews with a phenomenological approach-an approach that aims to provide detailed examinations of personal lived experiences and to identify themes regarding how a particular phenomenon is experienced. Interview topics included experiences with primary TJA, PJI diagnosis and management, and patient perceptions of the success of their PJI management. Interviews were transcribed, and a thematic analysis was performed. The concordance between patient-defined and MSIS ORT-defined treatment success was calculated. RESULTS: Of 27 total patients, 21 (78%) reported considerable mental health impacts during the period from PJI onset to treatment conclusion. In defining successful PJI management, patients consistently emphasized the importance of function, pain relief, mobility, and independence. Nine (33%) of the patients (p < 0.001) did not agree with their MSIS ORT classification of success versus failure. CONCLUSIONS: PJI is a devastating complication following TJA, and success as defined by patients does not align with success as defined by clinicians. As a result, there is insufficient support offered to patients throughout the PJI management process. Future avenues for research include the exploration of the feasibility and impact of implementing patient-centered care models that feature psychological support. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".