Top

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Published in:

01-09-2015 | Hip

Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement

Authors: Marcin Kowalczuk, John Adamich, Nicole Simunovic, Forough Farrokhyar, Olufemi R. Ayeni

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 9/2015

Abstract

Purpose

As the body of literature on femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) continues to grow, clinicians turn to systematic reviews to remain current with the best available evidence. The quality of systematic reviews in the FAI literature is currently unknown. The goal of this study was to assess the quality of the reporting of systematic reviews addressing FAI over the last 11 years (2003–2014) and to identify the specific methodological shortcomings and strengths.

Methods

A search of the electronic databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed, was performed to identify relevant systematic reviews. Methodological quality was assessed by two reviewers using the revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) scoring tool. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) was used to determine agreement between reviewers on R-AMSTAR quality scores.

Results

A total of 22 systematic reviews were assessed for methodological quality. The mean consensus R-AMSTAR score across all studies was 26.7 out of 40.0, indicating fair methodological quality. An ICC of 0.931, 95 % CI 0.843–0.971 indicated excellent agreement between reviewers during the scoring process.

Conclusions

The systematic reviews addressing FAI are generally of fair methodological quality. Use of tools such as the R-AMSTAR score or PRISMA guidelines while designing future systematic reviews can assist in eliminating methodological shortcomings identified in this review. These shortcomings need to be kept in mind by clinicians when applying the current literature to their patient populations and making treatment decisions. Systematic reviews of highest methodological quality should be used by clinicians when possible to answer clinical questions.

Level of evidence

IV.

Available only for authorised users

Alradwan H, Philippon MJ, Farrokhyar F et al (2012) Return to preinjury activity levels after surgical management of femoroacetabular impingement in athletes. Arthroscopy 28(10):1567–1576CrossRefPubMed

Ayeni OR, Wong I, Chien T et al (2012) Surgical indications for arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy 28(8):1170–1179CrossRefPubMed

Ayeni OR, Chan K, Al-Asiri J et al (2013) Sources and quality of literature addressing femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(2):415–419CrossRefPubMed

Ayeni OR, Naudie D, Crouch S et al (2013) Surgical indications for treatment for femoroacetabular impingement with surgical hip dislocation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(7):1676–1683CrossRefPubMed

Ayeni OR, Adamich J, Farrokhyar F et al (2014) Surgical management of labral tears during femoroacetabular impingement surgery: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(4):756–762CrossRefPubMed

Ayeni OR, Alradwan H, de Sa D, Philippon MJ (2014) The hip labrum reconstruction: indications and outcomes-a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(4):737–743CrossRefPubMed

Baldwin KD, Harrison RA, Namdari S et al (2009) Outcomes of hip arthroscopy for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. Curr Orthop Pract 20(6):669–673CrossRef

Bedi A, Chen N, Robertson W, Kelly BT (2008) The management of labral tears and femoroacetabular impingement of the hip in the young, active patient. Arthroscopy 24(10):1135–1145CrossRefPubMed

Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G et al (2012) The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Syst Rev 1:1PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

10.

Botser IB, Smith TW Jr, Nasser R, Domb BG (2011) Open surgical dislocation versus arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: a comparison of clinical outcomes. Arthroscopy 27(2):270–278CrossRefPubMed

11.

Chaudhry H, Ayeni OR (2014) The etiology of femoroacetabular impingement: what we know and what we don’t. Sports Health 6(2):157–161PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

12.

Chaudhry H, Mundi R, Singh I et al (2008) How good is the orthopaedic literature? Indian J Orthop 42(2):144–149PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

13.

Clohisy JC, St John LC, Schutz AL (2010) Surgical treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(2):555–564PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

14.

de Sa D, Urquhart N, Philippon M et al (2014) Alpha angle correction in femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(4):812–821CrossRefPubMed

15.

Deckert S, Kopkow C, Schmitt J (2014) Nonallergic comorbidities of atopic eczema: an overview of systematic reviews. Allergy 69(1):37–45CrossRefPubMed

16.

Egger M, Zellweger-Zahner T, Schneider M et al (1997) Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet 350(9074):326–329CrossRefPubMed

17.

Gagnier JJ, Kellam PJ (2013) Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(11):e771–e777CrossRefPubMed

18.

Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M et al (2003) Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 417:112–120PubMed

19.

Guyatt GH, Mills EJ, Elbourne D (2008) In the era of systematic reviews, does the size of an individual trial still matter. PLoS Med 5(1):e4PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

20.

Haddad B, Konan S, Haddad FS (2014) Debridement versus re-attachment of acetabular labral tears: a review of the literature and quantitative analysis. Bone Joint J 96-B (1):24–30

21.

Harris JD, Erickson BJ, Bush-Joseph CA, Nho SJ (2013) Treatment of femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 6(3):207–218PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

22.

Hartling L, Milne A, Hamm MP et al (2013) Testing the Newcastle Ottawa Scale showed low reliability between individual reviewers. J Clin Epidemiol 66(9):982–993CrossRefPubMed

23.

Haviv B, Burg A, Velkes S et al (2011) Trends in femoroacetabular impingement research over 11 years. Orthopedics 34(5):e29–e32

24.

Hetaimish BM, Khan M, Crouch S et al (2013) Consistency of reported outcomes after arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy 29(4):780–787CrossRefPubMed

25.

Kung J, Chiappelli F, Cajulis OO et al (2010) From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance. Open Dent J 4:84–91PubMedCentralPubMed

26.

Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174CrossRefPubMed

27.

Leibold MR, Huijbregts PA, Jensen R (2008) Concurrent criterion-related validity of physical examination tests for hip labral lesions: a systematic review. J Man Manip Ther 16(2):e24–e41PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

28.

Lodhia P, Slobogean GP, Noonan VK, Gilbart MK (2011) Patient-reported outcome instruments for femoroacetabular impingement and hip labral pathology: a systematic review of the clinimetric evidence. Arthroscopy 27(2):279–286CrossRefPubMed

29.

Matsuda DK, Carlisle JC, Arthurs SC, Wierks CH, Philippon MJ (2011) Comparative systematic review of the open dislocation, mini-open, and arthroscopic surgeries for femoroacetabular impingement. Arthroscopy 27(2):252–269CrossRefPubMed

30.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151(4):264–269

31.

Ng VY, Arora N, Best TM, Pan X, Ellis TJ (2010) Efficacy of surgery for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 38(11):2337–2345CrossRefPubMed

32.

Saadat E, Martin SD, Thornhill TS et al (2013) Factors associated with the failure of surgical treatment for femoroacetabular impingement: review of the literature. Am J Sports Med 42:1487PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

33.

Sankar WN, Nevitt M, Parvizi J et al (2013) Femoroacetabular impingement: defining the condition and its role in the pathophysiology of osteoarthritis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 21(Suppl 1):s7–s15CrossRefPubMed

34.

Schmitter M, Sterzenbach G, Faggion CM Jr, Krastl G (2013) A flood tide of systematic reviews on endodontic posts: methodological assessment using of R-AMSTAR. Clin Oral Investig 17(5):1287–1294CrossRefPubMed

35.

Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25(9):603–605CrossRefPubMed

36.

Tijssen M, Van Cingel R, Willemsen L, De Visser E (2012) Diagnostics of femoroacetabular impingement and labral pathology of the hip: a systematic review of the accuracy and validity of physical tests. Arthroscopy 28(6):860–871CrossRefPubMed

37.

Wall PDH, Fernandez M, Griffin DR, Foster NE (2013) Nonoperative treatment for femoroacetabular impingement: a systematic review of the literature. PM R 5(5):418–426CrossRefPubMed

38.

Yang AW, Li CG, Da Costa C et al (2009) Assessing quality of case series studies: development and validation of an instrument by herbal medicine CAM researchers. J Altern Complement Med 15(5):513–522CrossRefPubMed

Title: Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement
Authors: Marcin Kowalczuk
John Adamich
Nicole Simunovic
Forough Farrokhyar
Olufemi R. Ayeni
Publication date: 01-09-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 9/2015
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3151-x

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Methodological quality of systematic reviews addressing femoroacetabular impingement

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Level of evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 9/2015

The influence of sex hormones on anterior cruciate ligament rupture: female study

Outcomes of arthroscopic arthrolysis for the post-traumatic elbow stiffness

Assessment of neuromuscular risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament injury through tensiomyography in male soccer players

Foreseeing the danger in the beach chair position: Are standard measurement methods reliable?

Biomechanical consequences of proximal biceps tenodesis stitch location: musculotendinous junction versus tendon only

Biomechanical evaluation of knee kinematics after anatomic single- and anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstructions with medial meniscal repair