Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review
Introduction: Pin site infection is a commonly encountered complication. There is no universally accepted definition or classification system which impairs data interpretation and the development of evidence-based practice. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the existing classificat...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jlimblengthrecon.org/article.asp?issn=2455-3719;year=2022;volume=8;issue=3;spage=59;epage=68;aulast=Iliadis |
| _version_ | 1811220624219045888 |
|---|---|
| author | Alexis Dimitris Iliadis David William Shields Bilal Jamal Nima Heidari |
| author_facet | Alexis Dimitris Iliadis David William Shields Bilal Jamal Nima Heidari |
| author_sort | Alexis Dimitris Iliadis |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: Pin site infection is a commonly encountered complication. There is no universally accepted definition or classification system which impairs data interpretation and the development of evidence-based practice. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the existing classification systems and the quality of reporting pin site infections in the current literature. Materials and Methods: The systematic review protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO; National Institute for Health Research and University of York, 2015) and conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A comprehensive search strategy was executed. Data were extracted pertaining to clinical, radiological, microbiological, and mechanical elements alongside associated grading and demographics. The scope of the classification systems was considered. Results: Twelve reports of classifications were included in the synthesis. Four classifications provide information for guiding decision-making and management while the remainder are descriptive or informative in nature. There is no classification with prognostic inference. Four of the classifications can only be applied retrospectively as they are outcome derived. Staging relies on a single variable in six of the classifications. It relies on multiple variables (maximum of four) in the remainder. Conclusion: There is a lack of a clear definition of pin site infection and a lack of a universally accepted grading system. Existing classifications focus on different aspects and have a number of limitations. Establishing standard reporting guidelines will allow for future development of a meaningful and universally accepted definition and classification. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T07:45:19Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-c4f56227ce3f4db6a0c6377faf54110f |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2455-3719 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T07:45:19Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction |
| spelling | doaj.art-c4f56227ce3f4db6a0c6377faf54110f2022-12-22T03:41:43ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction2455-37192022-01-0183596810.4103/jllr.jllr_31_21Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic reviewAlexis Dimitris IliadisDavid William ShieldsBilal JamalNima HeidariIntroduction: Pin site infection is a commonly encountered complication. There is no universally accepted definition or classification system which impairs data interpretation and the development of evidence-based practice. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the existing classification systems and the quality of reporting pin site infections in the current literature. Materials and Methods: The systematic review protocol was prospectively registered (PROSPERO; National Institute for Health Research and University of York, 2015) and conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A comprehensive search strategy was executed. Data were extracted pertaining to clinical, radiological, microbiological, and mechanical elements alongside associated grading and demographics. The scope of the classification systems was considered. Results: Twelve reports of classifications were included in the synthesis. Four classifications provide information for guiding decision-making and management while the remainder are descriptive or informative in nature. There is no classification with prognostic inference. Four of the classifications can only be applied retrospectively as they are outcome derived. Staging relies on a single variable in six of the classifications. It relies on multiple variables (maximum of four) in the remainder. Conclusion: There is a lack of a clear definition of pin site infection and a lack of a universally accepted grading system. Existing classifications focus on different aspects and have a number of limitations. Establishing standard reporting guidelines will allow for future development of a meaningful and universally accepted definition and classification.http://www.jlimblengthrecon.org/article.asp?issn=2455-3719;year=2022;volume=8;issue=3;spage=59;epage=68;aulast=Iliadisclassificationdefinitioninfectionpin sitepin trackscoringstaging |
| spellingShingle | Alexis Dimitris Iliadis David William Shields Bilal Jamal Nima Heidari Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review Journal of Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction classification definition infection pin site pin track scoring staging |
| title | Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review |
| title_full | Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review |
| title_short | Current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting: A systematic review |
| title_sort | current classifications of pin site infection and quality of reporting a systematic review |
| topic | classification definition infection pin site pin track scoring staging |
| url | http://www.jlimblengthrecon.org/article.asp?issn=2455-3719;year=2022;volume=8;issue=3;spage=59;epage=68;aulast=Iliadis |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT alexisdimitrisiliadis currentclassificationsofpinsiteinfectionandqualityofreportingasystematicreview AT davidwilliamshields currentclassificationsofpinsiteinfectionandqualityofreportingasystematicreview AT bilaljamal currentclassificationsofpinsiteinfectionandqualityofreportingasystematicreview AT nimaheidari currentclassificationsofpinsiteinfectionandqualityofreportingasystematicreview |