Nowell et al. set out to understand patient decision making in total knee arthroplasty as there is limited research in this area. Focus groups were formed within an online community and identified decisions about total knee arthroplasty beyond the decision to have the surgery itself. An online survey was used to determine relative importance of five major decisions. Patients reported that they felt they did not have enough information to make important decisions of surgeon, device type, surgical approach, facility, or timing for their surgery.
Because patients can have poor understanding of outcomes related to total knee replacement (TKR) surgery, Fraenkel et al. studied the impacts of different presentation formats in patients’ understanding of TKR outcomes. 648 members of an online arthritis network participated in this study and were randomly assigned to one of the following presentation groups: numeric only, numeric with an icon array, numeric with a set of 50 images, or numeric with a functional spinner. Preferences for TKR were measured before and immediately after viewing the presentation and knowledge was assessed for each participant. The authors found that adding graphic information to descriptive statistics strengthens preference for TKR.
Social media, such as Facebook, blogs, and discussion boards, may be a useful resource to complement traditional data sources in understanding and treating inflammatory arthritis. In this study, Curtis et al, used the TREATO platform to search publicly-available data mentioning inflammatory arthritis. The researchers found 785,656 posts related to arthritis predominantly in the U.S. (75%) and authored by patients (87%). The most common sources of social media posting were from Facebook, the Arthritis Foundation, RemedySpot, DailyStrength, and RA Warrior.
This is a correction to the previously published article “Understanding the Bariatric Patient Perspective in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Bariatric Study”. This correction notes that the original article had the incorrect listing of author names and affiliations. This correction reflects the correct author names and affiliations.