A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

'The unexpected journey': a qualitative interview study exploring patient and health professionals experiences of participating in the knee arthroplasty versus joint distraction study (KARDS). | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The KARDS trial studied if knee joint distraction (KJD) is as good as knee replacement surgery (KR) for treating knee problems.
  • Researchers talked to 11 staff members and 11 patients to understand their experiences and feelings during the trial.
  • Key findings showed that giving clear information about treatments and recovery is super important, and they learned that having a good rehab plan after KJD is necessary for helping patients recover smoothly.

Article Abstract

Objective: The aim of the knee arthroplasty versus joint distraction (KARDS) randomised trial was to investigate whether knee joint distraction (KJD) is non-inferior to knee arthroplasty, also known as knee replacement (KR). Here we report the findings from qualitative interviews that were part of the planned KARDS process evaluation.

Design And Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews with staff and participants in secondary care. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis.

Findings: We were unable to complete the full-planned KARDS process evaluation as recruitment to the trial was closed early but key common themes emerged.Eleven members of staff were interviewed from two KARDS sites (eight initial interviews just after site opening and three follow-up interviews at 12 months). Eleven KARDS participants (six KR and five KJD) were interviewed. One overarching theme emerged: 'An unexpected journey'. This incorporated subthemes including 'an important research question', 'a roller coaster ride', 'lessons learnt', 'managing expectations' and 'a slow recovery'. These encapsulate experiences of both staff and participants.

Conclusion: The information that we were able to collect highlights that providing adequate and comprehensive information about all aspects of treatment including estimated timelines of recovery are essential in clinical trials of novel interventions. Incorporating a comprehensive rehabilitation package following KJD was a key learning. Process evaluations in these complex trials are essential to determine issues as early as possible so appropriate changes can be made to ensure participants have a smooth journey through the trial experience.

Trial Registration Number: ISRCTN14879004.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11253130PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083069DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

knee arthroplasty
12
joint distraction
12
unexpected journey'
8
arthroplasty versus
8
versus joint
8
qualitative interviews
8
kards process
8
kards
6
knee
5
'the unexpected
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!