-
- Cammille C Go, Cynthia Kyin, David R Maldonado, and Benjamin G Domb.
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
- Arthroscopy. 2020 Dec 1; 36 (12): 3092-3105.
PurposeTo 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.MethodsTwo 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.ResultsWe 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.ConclusionsProgression 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 Of EvidenceLevel IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.