Denise Schulz, Catharina Gaeth, Martin C Jordan, Steven C Herath, Christopher Spering, Dan Bieler, Joachim Windolf, Anne Neubert
{"title":"Developing a core outcome set for acetabular fractures: a systematic review (part I).","authors":"Denise Schulz, Catharina Gaeth, Martin C Jordan, Steven C Herath, Christopher Spering, Dan Bieler, Joachim Windolf, Anne Neubert","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02824-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are indications that clinical studies investigating the surgical treatment of acetabular fractures assess different outcomes. This heterogeneity reduces the comparability of study results and, thus, limits the knowledge generated from research. Core outcome sets (COS) contain a minimum set of outcomes that should be measured in studies investigating a specific disease or injury. A COS for surgically treated acetabular fractures does not yet exist. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify the reported outcomes in studies investigating the surgical treatment of acetabular fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Studies including skeletally mature individuals (≥ 16 years) with isolated acetabular fractures treated surgically were included. Studies with polytrauma patients, pathological fractures, additional pelvic fractures, exclusively non-surgical treatment, or juvenile individuals were excluded. Three databases and two clinical trial registries were searched on 15 November 2022. The identified outcomes were grouped and subsequently categorized according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 193 studies were included, which reported a cumulative total of 2581 outcomes. After grouping, 266 unique outcomes were identified. No outcome was examined in all studies. Pain, ability to walk independently, range of motion, quality of reduction, and heterotopic ossification were the most reported unique outcomes and assessed in at least 60% of included studies. A total of 105 outcomes were only assessed in one of the included studies. Outcomes of all five core areas and 25 outcome domains of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials taxonomy were examined. Furthermore, outcomes were named and defined differently, measured at different time points, and assessed using a variety of measurement instruments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, this systematic review shows that a wide range of outcomes are measured in studies examining surgical treatment of acetabular fractures. The results of this systematic review will be used in a subsequent study to develop the COS for surgically treated acetabular fractures by using the Delphi method.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO: CRD42022357644; COMET: 2123.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"83"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11983908/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02824-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: There are indications that clinical studies investigating the surgical treatment of acetabular fractures assess different outcomes. This heterogeneity reduces the comparability of study results and, thus, limits the knowledge generated from research. Core outcome sets (COS) contain a minimum set of outcomes that should be measured in studies investigating a specific disease or injury. A COS for surgically treated acetabular fractures does not yet exist. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify the reported outcomes in studies investigating the surgical treatment of acetabular fractures.
Methods: Studies including skeletally mature individuals (≥ 16 years) with isolated acetabular fractures treated surgically were included. Studies with polytrauma patients, pathological fractures, additional pelvic fractures, exclusively non-surgical treatment, or juvenile individuals were excluded. Three databases and two clinical trial registries were searched on 15 November 2022. The identified outcomes were grouped and subsequently categorized according to the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Guidelines.
Results: A total of 193 studies were included, which reported a cumulative total of 2581 outcomes. After grouping, 266 unique outcomes were identified. No outcome was examined in all studies. Pain, ability to walk independently, range of motion, quality of reduction, and heterotopic ossification were the most reported unique outcomes and assessed in at least 60% of included studies. A total of 105 outcomes were only assessed in one of the included studies. Outcomes of all five core areas and 25 outcome domains of the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials taxonomy were examined. Furthermore, outcomes were named and defined differently, measured at different time points, and assessed using a variety of measurement instruments.
Conclusion: Overall, this systematic review shows that a wide range of outcomes are measured in studies examining surgical treatment of acetabular fractures. The results of this systematic review will be used in a subsequent study to develop the COS for surgically treated acetabular fractures by using the Delphi method.
期刊介绍:
Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.