From Consensus to Everyday Clinical Practice: Quantifying the Knowledge Translation of the 2018 International...

Experts from all over the world came together at the 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) on Musculoskeletal Infection to discuss important issues in the identification, management, and avoidance of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) and associated musculoskeletal infections. With the goal of harmonizing global approaches, guiding clinical practice, and standardizing definitions, the proceedings produced 71 manuscripts published in various orthopaedic subspecialties. Despite the widespread dissemination of the ICM 2018 proceedings, their scholarly influence has not been systematically quantified.

This bibliometric study evaluates the academic impact of these publications over the past seven years through an analysis of citation patterns. Each of the 71 manuscripts was categorized into six subspecialties: Hip and Knee, General Assembly, Shoulder, Trauma/Sports/Oncology/Pediatric, Spine, and Foot and Ankle. Citation counts were used as a proxy for academic influence. We went a step further than counting citations. We used bibliometric mapping to see which ICM 2018 recommendation areas resonated most with the global community.

Our analysis of 2,881 total citations revealed marked heterogeneity across subspecialties. Hip and Knee articles generated 50.2% of all citations, followed by general assembly (39.3%), shoulder (5.2%), trauma/sports/oncology/pediatric (4.0%), spine (1.3%), and foot and ankle (0.2%). The five most influential articles-all from Hip and Knee or General Assembly subgroups-accounted for a substantial portion of total citations.

These findings may support more targeted knowledge translation into everyday musculoskeletal infection practice while also highlighting gaps and future opportunities for investigation and clinical implementation.