ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at 10 European College of Veterinary Surgeons conferences from 2006 to 2015, report the key publication milestones, and determine variables associated with full manuscript publication. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. SAMPLE POPULATION: One thousand thirty-eight abstracts. METHODS: All conference abstracts (n = 1038) from the 2006 to 2015 annual ECVS scientific meetings were reviewed, and final publication was determined through a comprehensive bibliographic search. Categories for the level of evidence (LoE), subject, discipline, and institution affiliation were assigned for each abstract. Dates of manuscript submission, acceptance, and publication were recorded. RESULTS: The overall publication rate for ECVS abstracts from 2006 to 2015 was 32%. Abstracts with levels 4 (60%) and 5 (23%) evidence were presented the most at ECVS conferences and had the highest publication rates at 38% and 36%, respectively. Key publication milestones showed that most abstracts (83%) received publication within the first 36 months with most LoE 2 abstracts (91%) being published within 24 months of presentation. Most published abstracts were affiliated with academic institutions (85%), on dog (29%) and horse (27%) subjects, focused on orthopedic (35%) and soft tissue disciplines (27%), and published in Veterinary Surgery (32%). CONCLUSION: The ECVS abstract publication rate was lower, and timeline was longer to publish than other veterinary surgical conferences. Publication occurred most frequently in academic institutions, in select journals, and was limited to orthopedic, soft-tissue, dog, and horse studies. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Results from this study may help improve the publication fate of abstracts in veterinary surgery. Additionally, caution is warranted when using information from abstracts that have yet to be published to help guide clinical decisions.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of a novel screw type on stiffness and failure characteristics of a tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) construct under cyclic loading conditions. The authors hypothesized that bone-screw-fasteners (BSF) would result in superior biomechanical stability compared with locking buttress screws (LBS). Materials and Methods: Twelve pairs of canine cadaveric pelvic limbs were included in this ex vivo biomechanical study. A TPLO was performed using a 3.5mm locking TPLO plate and stabilized using either LBS or BSF. Cyclic loading was performed for 30,000 cycles at 4Hz with a peak-load of 1000N (50N valley). The cyclic test was then continued by stepwise incremental increase of peak-load at a rate of 75N per 500 cycles until failure. Results: Cycles to failure for LBS (44,260 ± 5,770) and BSF (41,540 ± 7,686) were not significantly different (p = 0.36). Maximum force for LBS (3,134 ± 797N) and BSF (2,940 ± 831N) was not significantly different either (p = 0.58). Dynamic stiffness for LBS (1,778 ± 932 N/mm) and BSF (1,574 ± 677 N/mm) was not significantly different (p = 0.58). Discussion: Stabilization of the TPLO with BSF provided similar biomechanical stability under cyclic axial loading conditions as the LBS. BSF may be an acceptable alternative to traditional locking screws for TPLO.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the publication rate (PR) and report descriptive findings from abstracts presented at the American College of Veterinary Surgeons (ACVS), the Veterinary Orthopaedic Society (VOS), and those presented at both conferences. STUDY DESIGN: All conference abstracts from 2001 to 2010 ACVS and VOS meetings were reviewed. PR in peer-reviewed journals was evaluated and compared between Group 1 (abstracts presented at ACVS only; n = 1,277), Group 2 (abstracts presented at VOS only; n = 645), and Group 3 (abstracts presented at both conferences; n = 121) abstracts. Abstracts were assigned a level of evidence (LoE) score. RESULTS: Approximately 6% of all abstracts evaluated were presented at two scientific meetings (Group 3). The PR of Group 1 (66%) and Group 3 (62%) abstracts was significantly higher than that of Group 2 (45%). The majority of abstracts were assigned a low LoE (3 or 4). Once presented, most Group 3 abstracts took <12 months to be submitted and <24 months to be published. CONCLUSION: This study found that a limited number of abstracts were presented at both ACVS and VOS, and PR was significantly different between those presented at ACVS only or both ACVS and VOS compared with VOS only. There was no significant difference in PR between Group 1 and Group 3 abstracts. This study has provided the initial comparison between abstracts presented at two veterinary surgical conferences.
Subject(s)
Orthopedics , Surgery, Veterinary , Animals , Societies, Medical , Orthopedics/veterinaryABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Scientific abstracts are a common method for disseminating new research. There is no information on the publication rate of orthopaedic surgery abstracts presented at the annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society (VOS) Conference. The objectives of this study were to document the publication rate, the publication timeline and the level of evidence (LoE) of abstracts presented at an annual orthopaedic meeting. STUDY DESIGN: All conference abstracts from the 2001 to 2014 annual VOS meeting were reviewed, and final publication was determined through a comprehensive bibliographic search. RESULTS: Over 14 conferences, 1,112 scientific abstracts were presented with an overall publication rate of 47%. The majority of abstracts had low LoE scores, and those abstracts were published less timely than ones with higher LoE scores. Once presented, most abstracts took 1 year to be submitted and 2 years to be published. Dog (45%) and ex vivo (19%) studies were the most common. Publication occurred most frequently in Veterinary Surgery (40%), Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology (17%) and the American Journal of Veterinary Research (12%). CONCLUSION: The publication rate for abstracts presented at the annual VOS meeting is lower than those from a more generalized veterinary surgery conference. Publication occurs most frequently in a select group of journals, and the subject matter is limited in scope with a focus on dog and ex vivo studies. Overall, most abstracts presented at VOS contain a lower LoE.
