Revision Knee Replacement Question Verification Form

James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership Question Verification Form

The purpose of this Question Verification Form is to enable Priority Setting Partnerships (PSPs) to describe clearly how they checked that their questions were unanswered, before starting the interim prioritisation stage of the process.

Name of PSP

Revision Knee Replacement PSP

Please describe the scope of the PSP

“Patients who have a problematic primary (partial or total) knee replacement from the point they experience problems with that joint, through the management stage (which encompasses operative or non-operative therapies), and during the rehabilitation stage up until 2 years post operatively”

Please provide a brief overview of your approach to checking whether the questions were unanswered

University of Oxford Based Evidence Specialist designed a search strategy to identify level 1 evidence ( SR or RCT level) related to this field. This level of evidence was selected as the evidence in this field is known to be limited which prompted the PSP) and most practice occurs based on personal experience or low level case series / cohort studies. The resultant database of 2009 papers was screened and full papers examined as necessary , but at least 2 reviewers, but some by 3 reviewers for clarification.

Please list the type(s) of evidence you used to verify your questions as unanswered

Systematic Review and Randomise Control Trial level evidence

Please list the sources that you searched in order to identify that evidence

Medline, Embase, CINAHL databases

What search terms did you use?

(Embase strategy as e.g.)
1 reoperation/ (75257)
2 (repeat* or revision* or redo or "re do" or reoperat*).ti,ab. (797068)
3 1 or 2 (830246)
4 exp knee replacement/ (8638)
5 knee/ (57427)
6 knee*.ti,ab. (169614)
7 5 or 6 (176631)
8 exp arthroplasty/ (61983)
9 (replac* or arthroplast*).ti,ab. (546147)
10 8 or 9 (560996)
11 7 and 10 (43271)
12 4 or 11 (44079)
13 3 and 12 (8033)
14 meta-analysis/ or systematic review/ or meta-analysis as topic/ or "meta analysis (topic)"/ or "systematic review (topic)"/ or exp technology assessment, biomedical/ (330314)
15 ((systematic* adj3 (review* or overview*)) or (methodologic* adj3 (review* or overview*))).ti,ab,kw. (186829)
16 ((quantitative adj3 (review* or overview* or synthes*)) or (research adj3 (integrati* or overview*))).ti,ab,kw. (10959)
17 ((integrative adj3 (review* or overview*)) or (collaborative adj3 (review* or overview*)) or (pool* adj3 analy*)).ti,ab,kw. (31263)
18 (data synthes* or data extraction* or data abstraction*).ti,ab,kw. (27754)
19 (handsearch* or hand search*).ti,ab,kw. (10074)
20 (mantel haenszel or peto or der simonian or dersimonian or fixed effect* or latin square*).ti,ab,kw. (29583)
21 (met analy* or metanaly* or technology assessment* or HTA or HTAs or technology overview* or technology appraisal*).ti,ab,kw. (13065)
22 (meta regression* or metaregression*).ti,ab,kw. (8661)
23 (meta-analy* or metaanaly* or systematic review* or biomedical technology assessment* or bio-medical technology assessment*).mp,hw. (403283)
24 (medline or cochrane or pubmed or medlars or embase or cinahl).ti,ab,hw. (239803)
25 (cochrane or (health adj2 technology assessment) or evidence report).jw. (25617)
26 (comparative adj3 (efficacy or effectiveness)).ti,ab,kw. (16927)
27 (outcomes research or relative effectiveness).ti,ab,kw. (12079)
28 ((indirect or indirect treatment or mixed-treatment) adj comparison*).ti,ab,kw. (3480)
29 14 or 15 or 16 or 17 or 18 or 19 or 20 or 21 or 22 or 23 or 24 or 25 or 26 or 27 or 28 (578371)
30 Randomized Controlled Trial/ (529371)
31 "randomized controlled trial (topic)"/ (155588)
32 exp randomization/ (80736)
33 double blind procedure/ (156657)
34 single blind procedure/ (33525)
35 placebo/ (328527)
36 (random* or sham or placebo*).ti,ab,hw,kw. (1843856)
37 ((singl* or doubl*) adj (blind* or dumm* or mask*)).ti,ab,hw,kw. (280875)
38 ((tripl* or trebl*) adj (blind* or dumm* or mask*)).ti,ab,hw,kw. (1057)
39 30 or 31 or 32 or 33 or 34 or 35 or 36 or 37 or 38 (1874638)
40 exp consensus/ (58691)
41 consensus development/ (22812)
42 clinical pathway/ (7925)
43 exp practice guideline/ (482482)
44 (position statement* or policy statement* or practice parameter* or best practice*).ti,ab,kw. (39992)
45 (standards or guideline or guidelines).ti,kw. (136870)
46 ((practice or treatment* or clinical) adj guideline*).ab. (51610)
47 (CPG or CPGs).ti. (6441)
48 consensus*.ti,kw. (28524)
49 consensus*.ab. (179804)
50 ((critical or clinical or practice) adj2 (path or paths or pathway or pathways or protocol*)).ti,ab,kw. (27524)
51 recommendat*.ti,kw. (45912)
52 (care adj2 (standard or path or paths or pathway or pathways or map or maps or plan or plans)).ti,ab,kw. (84988)
53 (algorithm* adj2 (screening or examination or test or tested or testing or assessment* or diagnosis or diagnoses or diagnosed or diagnosing)).ti,ab,kw. (8910)
54 (algorithm* adj2 (pharmacotherap* or chemotherap* or chemotreatment* or therap* or treatment* or intervention*)).ti,ab,kw. (12759)
55 40 or 41 or 42 or 43 or 44 or 45 or 46 or 47 or 48 or 49 or 50 or 51 or 52 or 53 or 54 (899620)
56 29 or 39 or 55 (2995903)
57 13 and 56 (1146)

Please describe the parameters of the search (e.g. time limits, excluded sources, country/language) and the rationale for any limitations

No time or country restrictions were used. (inception to present)

Names of individuals who undertook the evidence checking

Nick Kalson, Vikki Wylde, Johnny Mathews, Simon Abram, Polly Tarrant

On what date was the question verification process completed?

1.3.19

Any other relevant information

Lead surgeons from 3 academic centres, with roles on the national knee society executive committee including President, Research and Education leads confirmed no significant papers missed during this process which answered the shortlisted questions.

Version 1 Date 12.12.19