Home » Reviews
Compliance with Sleep Instructions After Total Hip Arthroplasty
By Mr. Chetan S Modi , Mr. Suribabu Gudipati , Ms. Charlotte Poole , Mr. Stuart Brooks
Submited on: 05 Oct 2012 02:41:38 AM GMT
Published on: 05 Oct 2012 05:38:33 PM GMT
 
Succint, but Perhaps it Should have had a Question in it to Draw the Reader such as
Posted by Mr. Njalalle Baraza on 12 Oct 2012 09:57:32 AM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The paper claims that there is a need to revisit sleep instructions given to patients after THA. The isuue is topical as THA is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures, and questions regarding sleep are frequently asked.

     

    The study will arm clinicians to be able to confidently tell patients that whereas there is a theoretical benefit in letting soft tissues heal and settle in immediate post op period, there  is no advantage in prolonged supine posture so they can assume the sleeping position that is most comfortable to them without fear of complications.

     

    In addition this study is the first of its kind. 


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    NA


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    There is no previous literature with which to compare this paper, so it has opened a discussion into the relevance of the information we give patients in the immediate pre and post op period. Is what we tell them simply handed down from our predecessors or is it backed by solid scientific studies?


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    The reuslts do support the claims


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    No deviations from the protocol of information gathering


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    The methodology is valid and the study can be reproduced


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    If the study had greater numbers, was carried out in multiple centres so that the input is from various surgeons, then the data would give amuch clearer indication on whether we should revise the post-op sleeping protocol. This work wouldn't be too difficult to perform given the regularity with which THAs are performed.


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    The paper is good as it is topical, clinically relevant and addresses a problem that is not always apparent to us as surgeons. The results should be made available widely for surgeons to decide whether to incorporate into their clinical practice and I definitely see this being presentable and well received in an international conference.


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Competing interests:
    None
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Registrar in Trauma and Orthopaedics - 6 years experience

  • How to cite:  Baraza N .Succint, but Perhaps it Should have had a Question in it to Draw the Reader such as [Review of the article 'Compliance with Sleep Instructions After Total Hip Arthroplasty ' by Brooks S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(10):WMCRW002296
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
Hip Arthroplasty Review
Posted by Anonymous Reviewer on 05 Oct 2012 08:05:39 PM GMT

  • What are the main claims of the paper and how important are they?

    The authors have identified an area of postop rehab after thr that has not been addressed in the literature. They have identified the difficulties that patients have complying with the sleeping instructions and question their validity. These are important points to raise but further study is required.


  • Are these claims novel? If not, please specify papers that weaken the claims to the originality of this one.

    Very few studies in the literature have addressed these issues. This study has identified a poorly studied area of rehab which further studies should aim to address.


  • Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature?

    See above-no literature to compare.


  • Do the results support the claims? If not, what other evidence is required?

    Yes although there are weaknesses. Rather simple methodology but does identify the problem which is the main aim.


  • If a protocol is provided, for example for a randomized controlled trial, are there any important deviations from it? If so, have the authors explained adequately why the deviations occurred?

    Methodology well described. Prospective study. Only one patient lost to follow up.


  • Is the methodology valid? Does the paper offer enough details of its methodology that its experiments or its analyses could be reproduced?

    Yes the methodology is valid and well described.


  • Would any other experiments or additional information improve the paper? How much better would the paper be if this extra work was done, and how difficult would such work be to do, or to provide?

    Not required for this study. 


  • Is this paper outstanding in its discipline? (For example, would you like to see this work presented in a seminar at your hospital or university? Do you feel these results need to be incorporated in your next general lecture on the subject?) If yes, what makes it outstanding? If not, why not?

    No - not outstanding but has identified a significant problem for patients that should be considered when providing postoperative instructions .


  • Other Comments:

    NA

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    Dealing with hip arthroplasty patients pre- and postoperatively.

  • How to cite:  Anonymous.Hip Arthroplasty Review[Review of the article 'Compliance with Sleep Instructions After Total Hip Arthroplasty ' by Brooks S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(10):WMCRW002281
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 
 
 
We use cookies on this website to measure and improve performance. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.