Hierarchy of evidence relating to hand surgery in Brazilian orthopedic journals.

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

There is no systematic assessment of the quality of scientific production in the specialty of hand surgery in our setting. This study aimed to systematically assess the status of evidence generation relating to hand surgery and to evaluate the reproducibility of the classification method based on an evidence pyramid.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Secondary study conducted at Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp) and Faculdade Estadual de Medicina de Marília (Famema).

METHODS

Two researchers independently conducted an electronic database search for hand surgery studies published between 2000 and 2009 in the two main Brazilian orthopedic journals (Acta Ortopédica Brasileira and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia). The studies identified were subsequently classified according to methodological design (systematic review of the literature, randomized clinical trial, cohort study, case-control study, case series and other studies) and evidence level (I to V).

RESULTS

A total of 1,150 articles were evaluated, and 83 (7.2%) were included in the final analysis. Studies with evidence level IV (case series) accounted for 41 (49%) of the published papers. Studies with evidence level V (other studies) accounted for 12 (14.5%) of the papers. Only two studies (2.4%) were ranked as level I or II. The inter-rater reproducibility was excellent (k = 0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Hand surgery articles corresponded to less than one tenth of Brazilian orthopedic production. Studies with evidence level IV were the commonest type. The reproducibility of the classification stratified by evidence level was almost perfect.