Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
American Hip Institute Research Foundation, Des Plaines, Illinois, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2020 Dec;36(12):3092-3105. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.06.033. Epub 2020 Jul 15.
To systematically review the literature to (1) identify the reported learning curves associated with hip arthroscopy and (2) evaluate the effect of the stated learning curves on outcomes, such as complication rates, surgical and traction time, reoperation rates, and patient-reported outcome score (PRO) improvements.
Two independent reviewers screened the PubMed-MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library electronic databases from inception to January 2020 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following search algorithm was used: "hip arthroscopy" paired with "learning curve," "competence," "experience," "performance," and "motor skills." Data regarding study characteristics, patient demographic characteristics, PROs, and learning-curve analyses were collected.
We identified 15 studies that reported the impact of the learning curve on surgical progress or clinical outcome measures. Measures of the surgical process included surgical and traction time, as well as fluoroscopy time, whereas clinical outcome measures encompassed PROs, complication rates, and reoperation rates. Three studies reported that the learning curve plateaued at 30 cases, but other studies suggested cutoff points ranging from 20 to 519. Operative time (75-119 minutes vs 45-99 minutes), traction time (55-127 minutes vs 54-112 minutes), complication rates (0.5%-43.3% vs 0.5%-18.0%), revision arthroscopy rates (3.3%-10% vs 1.0%-4.2%), and rates of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (12.2%-22.5% vs 1.5%-3.7%) decreased as surgeons gained more experience. Favorable PROs were observed throughout the surgeons' experience.
Progression along the learning curve of hip arthroscopy led to decreases in complication rates, surgical and traction time, and reoperation rates. PROs benefited from surgery throughout the learning curve. Currently, there exists a wide spread of cutoff numbers proposed to achieve proficiency, ranging from 20 to over 500.
Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.
系统回顾文献,以(1)确定与髋关节镜检查相关的报告学习曲线,以及(2)评估学习曲线对并发症发生率、手术和牵引时间、再次手术率和患者报告的结果评分(PRO)改善等结果的影响。
两名独立审查员根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,从成立到 2020 年 1 月筛选了 PubMed-MEDLINE、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆电子数据库。使用了以下搜索算法:“髋关节镜检查”与“学习曲线”、“能力”、“经验”、“绩效”和“运动技能”配对。收集了有关研究特征、患者人口统计学特征、PRO 和学习曲线分析的数据。
我们确定了 15 项研究报告了学习曲线对手术进展或临床结果测量的影响。手术过程的测量指标包括手术和牵引时间,以及透视时间,而临床结果测量指标包括 PRO、并发症发生率和再次手术率。三项研究报告称学习曲线在 30 例时达到平台期,但其他研究提出的截止点范围从 20 例到 519 例。手术时间(75-119 分钟比 45-99 分钟)、牵引时间(55-127 分钟比 54-112 分钟)、并发症发生率(0.5%-43.3%比 0.5%-18.0%)、翻修关节镜检查率(3.3%-10%比 1.0%-4.2%)和全髋关节置换术转换率(12.2%-22.5%比 1.5%-3.7%)随着外科医生经验的增加而降低。在外科医生的整个经验过程中观察到了有利的 PRO。
髋关节镜检查学习曲线的进展导致并发症发生率、手术和牵引时间以及再次手术率降低。PRO 受益于整个学习曲线的手术。目前,达到熟练程度的截止数字范围很广,从 20 到超过 500。
四级,四级研究的系统评价。