Optimistic bias: the more you do, the better you think it goes. Survey analysis of reverse shoulder arthroplasty.
arthroplasty
heuristics
outcome assessment
pain measurement
shoulder
Journal
Patient related outcome measures
ISSN: 1179-271X
Titre abrégé: Patient Relat Outcome Meas
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101551170
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
07
06
2019
accepted:
14
08
2019
entrez:
8
11
2019
pubmed:
7
11
2019
medline:
7
11
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Even though heuristics are very helpful, several biases have been described related to their use. The aim of this study is to analyze the influence of surgery volume on the surgeon's perception of pain improvement in patients after having received a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Successive independent samples study. Shoulder surgeons attending four shoulder meetings. 149 Shoulder surgeons were included. Physicians were asked to postulate the preoperative and postoperative pain of patients receiving a reverse shoulder arthroplasty and respond by putting a mark on two visual pain scales. Pain improvement, years of shoulder practice, number of shoulder studies read over 6 months and the number of reverse shoulder arthroplasties performed per year. To compare the answers of the survey-study, a cohort of 95 patients who had undergone reverse shoulder Arthroplasty because of a rotator cuff arthropathy were prospectively followed. Regarding the pain score before and after surgery, the patient cohort showed a mean improvement of 6.84 points. In terms of the doctors, the more years of surgical practice, led them to have a greater expectation of improvement ( Years of practice, hospital position and the number of shoulder arthroplasties done per year all favor the surgeon's perception that their patients obtain a greater pain relief after receiving a shoulder arthroplasty than the real improvement in pain relief the patients experience.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31695535
doi: 10.2147/PROM.S218710
pii: 218710
pmc: PMC6717935
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
277-282Informations de copyright
© 2019 Torrens et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jun 27;368(26):2445-8
pubmed: 23802513
Med Decis Making. 2015 May;35(4):539-57
pubmed: 25145577
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000 Dec;81(12):1567-74
pubmed: 11128891
Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2012 Mar;14(1):77-89
pubmed: 22577307
Med Educ. 2009 Aug;43(8):721-8
pubmed: 19573016
Clin Chem. 1993 Jul;39(7):1468-78; discussion 1478-80
pubmed: 8330409
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019 Jan;139(1):15-23
pubmed: 30159769
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 Sep 21;98(18):e77
pubmed: 27655989
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Mar;86(3):496-505
pubmed: 14996874
Med Educ. 2010 Jan;44(1):94-100
pubmed: 20078760
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987 Jan;(214):160-4
pubmed: 3791738
Am J Med. 2008 May;121(5 Suppl):S24-9
pubmed: 18440351
J Gen Intern Med. 1987 May-Jun;2(3):183-7
pubmed: 3295150
Am J Med. 2008 May;121(5 Suppl):S2-23
pubmed: 18440350
BMJ Qual Saf. 2013 Oct;22 Suppl 2:ii21-ii27
pubmed: 23771902
Am Psychol. 2009 Sep;64(6):515-26
pubmed: 19739881
Simul Healthc. 2015 Jun;10(3):139-45
pubmed: 25710315
Science. 1974 Sep 27;185(4157):1124-31
pubmed: 17835457
BMJ. 2000 Feb 19;320(7233):469-72
pubmed: 10678857
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Jan;24(1):91-7
pubmed: 25440519
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003 Mar-Apr;12(2):164-9
pubmed: 12700570
Acad Med. 1999 Jul;74(7):791-4
pubmed: 10429587
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 6;12(9):e0181970
pubmed: 28877170