Research Day
SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS IN ORTHOPAEDIC SPORTS MEDICINE: AN UPDATE
Document Type
Abstract
Date
2021
Abstract
Introduction:The volume of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published has continued to increase, including the field of sports medicine. These reviews are utilized by clinicians to guide clinical decision making. In 2009-2013, the quality of reviews in orthopaedic sports medicine was analyzed, and opportunities for improvement were identified.
Methods: We sought to evaluate the quality of systematic reviews published in the field of sports medicine in the five-year period from 2015-2019 and compare to those evaluated from 2009-2013. All clinical orthopaedic sports medicine and meta-analyses published from 2015 to 2019 published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy, The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, and Sports Health were reviewed. These were evaluated according to guidelines from Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA) statement, and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews(AMSTAR) tool.
Results: A total of 516 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included in this study, compared to 200 in 2009-2013. Of these, 17.1% of studies included level 1 or 2 evidence only, while 39.5% included level 4 or 5 studies. This represents a significant decrease in the level of evidence from 2009-2013(P<0.001). Both the average PRISMA scores(87% to 81%) and the average AMSTAR scores(73% to 56%) declined(P<0.001, P<0.001).
Conclusion: There has been an increase in the volume of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in orthopaedic sports medicine. This has coincided with significant declines in the level of evidence, as well as declines in methodological and reporting quality.