Patient Interest in Robotic Total Joint Arthroplasty Is Exponential: A 10-Year Google Trends Analysis.

Computer-assisted National trends Navigation Robotic arthroplasty Robotics

Journal

Arthroplasty today
ISSN: 2352-3441
Titre abrégé: Arthroplast Today
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101681808

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Historique:
received: 11 09 2021
revised: 28 12 2021
accepted: 12 02 2022
entrez: 1 4 2022
pubmed: 2 4 2022
medline: 2 4 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The use of robotics in arthroplasty continues to increase. Patient demand, patient expectations, and patient-directed marketing by industry and care providers each likely contributes to its increasing popularity. Trends in patient interest have not been well described. We used the online Google Trends tool to analyze trends in national public interest toward robotic and nonrobotic arthroplasty between 2011 and 2021. Google Trends online was queried for search terms related to nonrobotic hip and knee arthroplasty in addition to robotic hip, robotic knee, and general robotic arthroplasty between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2021. Google Trends Data demonstrated a significant linear increase in online searches related to nonrobotic total knee and hip arthroplasty. Online search volume for robotic hip arthroplasty was significant and linear, while that of robotic knee arthroplasty was significant and exponential. When combined, robotic joint arthroplasty demonstrated an exponential trend over the 10-year period. This increase was noted to be statistically significant when compared with nonrobotic arthroplasty search volume. Our study demonstrates that public interest in robotic total joint arthroplasty has increased significantly from 2011 through 2020. When compared with online search volume for conventional arthroplasty, this increasing growth is statistically significant. Public interest in robotic arthroplasty is anticipated to continue to increase, and care providers should be aware of this trend that impacts patient perceptions and expectations. Despite significant growth in interest for robotic arthroplasty, there is incomplete evidence supporting its use over nonrobotic arthroplasty. Additional high-quality studies are needed to inform provider decision-making and appropriately guide public interest in robot-assisted arthroplasty.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
The use of robotics in arthroplasty continues to increase. Patient demand, patient expectations, and patient-directed marketing by industry and care providers each likely contributes to its increasing popularity. Trends in patient interest have not been well described. We used the online Google Trends tool to analyze trends in national public interest toward robotic and nonrobotic arthroplasty between 2011 and 2021.
Material and methods UNASSIGNED
Google Trends online was queried for search terms related to nonrobotic hip and knee arthroplasty in addition to robotic hip, robotic knee, and general robotic arthroplasty between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2021.
Results UNASSIGNED
Google Trends Data demonstrated a significant linear increase in online searches related to nonrobotic total knee and hip arthroplasty. Online search volume for robotic hip arthroplasty was significant and linear, while that of robotic knee arthroplasty was significant and exponential. When combined, robotic joint arthroplasty demonstrated an exponential trend over the 10-year period. This increase was noted to be statistically significant when compared with nonrobotic arthroplasty search volume.
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
Our study demonstrates that public interest in robotic total joint arthroplasty has increased significantly from 2011 through 2020. When compared with online search volume for conventional arthroplasty, this increasing growth is statistically significant. Public interest in robotic arthroplasty is anticipated to continue to increase, and care providers should be aware of this trend that impacts patient perceptions and expectations. Despite significant growth in interest for robotic arthroplasty, there is incomplete evidence supporting its use over nonrobotic arthroplasty. Additional high-quality studies are needed to inform provider decision-making and appropriately guide public interest in robot-assisted arthroplasty.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35360676
doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2022.02.015
pii: S2352-3441(22)00053-X
pmc: PMC8961076
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

13-18

Informations de copyright

© 2022 The Authors.

Références

J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jun;36(6):1887-1894.e3
pubmed: 33741241
Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2005 Jul-Aug;143(4):391-8
pubmed: 16118753
Public Health Genomics. 2012;15(3-4):209-17
pubmed: 22488464
Bone Joint J. 2021 Jun;103-B(6):1009-1020
pubmed: 34058875
Arthroplast Today. 2019 Mar 12;5(1):88-95
pubmed: 31020030
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Nov;464:111-6
pubmed: 17563698
Bone Joint J. 2016 Dec;98-B(12):1625-1634
pubmed: 27909124
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2017 Nov 06;3(4):e86
pubmed: 29109071
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Oct;36(10):3616-3622
pubmed: 34172346
Bone Joint J. 2017 May;99-B(5):647-652
pubmed: 28455474
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Nov;35(11):3393-3409.e2
pubmed: 32234326
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Jun;34(6):1053-1057
pubmed: 30935801
Urol Clin North Am. 2014 Nov;41(4):591-6
pubmed: 25306170
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Oct;35(10):2813-2819
pubmed: 32534864
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Aug;34(8):1656-1661
pubmed: 31036450
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2015;12(6):727-35
pubmed: 26365088
J Arthroplasty. 2016 Oct;31(10):2353-63
pubmed: 27325369
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Oct;34(10):2197-2198
pubmed: 31445864
J Knee Surg. 2019 Mar;32(3):239-250
pubmed: 29715696
Postgrad Med J. 2018 Jun;94(1112):335-341
pubmed: 29776983
Bone Joint J. 2021 Jun;103-B(6 Supple A):74-80
pubmed: 34053292
Int Orthop. 2000;24(1):23-7
pubmed: 10774857
J Arthroplasty. 2011 Feb;26(2):178-86
pubmed: 20413247
J Health Commun. 2009 Jul-Aug;14(5):487-502
pubmed: 19657928
Clin Orthop Surg. 2017 Jun;9(2):169-176
pubmed: 28567218
J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7):1054-9
pubmed: 17920481
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013 Jan;471(1):118-26
pubmed: 22669549
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Dec;35(12):3474-3481.e2
pubmed: 32731999
Int Orthop. 2019 Jun;43(6):1283-1295
pubmed: 30219968

Auteurs

Joseph C Brinkman (JC)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Zachary K Christopher (ZK)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

M Lane Moore (ML)

Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Jordan R Pollock (JR)

Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Jack M Haglin (JM)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Joshua S Bingham (JS)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Classifications MeSH