[Predatory journals in Orthopedics and Traumatology]. / Revistas depredadoras en Ortopedia y Traumatología.

Predatory journals are distinguished from legitimate journals by their lack of adequate reviews and editorial processes, compromising the quality of published content. These journals do not conduct peer reviews or detect plagiarism, and accept manuscripts without requiring substantial modifications. Their near 100% acceptance rate is driven by profit motives, regardless of the content they publish. While they boast a prestigious editorial board composed of renowned researchers, in most cases, it is a facade aimed at impressing and attracting investigators. Furthermore, these journals lack appropriate ethical practices and are non-transparent in their editorial processes. Predatory journals have impacted multiple disciplines, including Orthopedics and Traumatology, and their presence remains unknown to many researchers, making them unwitting victims. Their strategy involves soliciting articles via email from authors who have published in legitimate journals, promising quick, easy, and inexpensive publication. The implications and negative consequences of predatory journals on the scientific community and researchers are numerous. The purpose of this work is to provide general information about these journals, specifically in the field of Orthopedics and Traumatology, offering guidelines to identify and avoid them, so that authors can make informed decisions when publishing their manuscripts and avoid falling into the hands of predatory journals or publishers.

Las revistas depredadoras se diferencian de las revistas legítimas por su falta de adecuadas revisiones y procesos editoriales, lo que compromete la calidad del contenido publicado. Estas revistas no llevan a cabo revisiones por pares ni realizan acciones que detecten y prevengan el plagio y aceptan manuscritos sin exigir modificaciones sustanciales. Su tasa de aceptación cercana al 100% se debe a su enfoque lucrativo, sin importarles el contenido que publican. Aunque presumen tener un comité editorial compuesto por investigadores destacados, en la mayoría de los casos es una simulación destinada a impresionar y atraer a los investigadores. Además, estas revistas carecen de prácticas éticas adecuadas y no son transparentes en sus procesos editoriales. Las revistas depredadoras han afectado a múltiples disciplinas, incluida la Ortopedia y Traumatología y su presencia es aún desconocida para muchos investigadores, lo que los convierte en víctimas sin saberlo. Su estrategia consiste en solicitar artículos por correo electrónico a autores que han publicado en revistas legítimas, prometiendo una publicación rápida, sencilla y económica. Las implicaciones y consecuencias negativas de las revistas depredadoras en la comunidad científica y los investigadores son numerosas. El propósito de este trabajo es proporcionar información general sobre estas revistas y específicamente en el campo de la Ortopedia y Traumatología, brindando pautas para identificarlas y evitarlas, para que los autores puedan tomar decisiones informadas al publicar sus manuscritos y evitar caer en manos de revistas o editoriales depredadoras.

Establishing a consensus on research priorities in orthopaedic trauma within South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal (MSK) injuries are one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. Despite improvements in trauma-related morbidity and mortality in high-income countries over recent years, outcomes following MSK injuries in low- and middle-income countries, such as South Africa (SA), have not. Despite governmental recognition that this is required, funding and research into this significant health burden are limited within SA. This study aims to identify research priorities within MSK trauma care using a consensus-based approach amongst MSK healthcare practitioners within SA. METHOD: Members from the Orthopaedic Research Collaboration in Africa (ORCA), based in SA, collaborated using a two round modified Delphi technique to form a consensus on research priorities within orthopaedic trauma care. Members involved in the process were orthopaedic healthcare practitioners within SA. RESULTS: Participants from the ORCA network, working within SA, scored research priorities across two Delphi rounds from low to high priority. We have published the overall top 10 research priorities for this Delphi process. Questions were focused on two broad groups-clinical effectiveness in trauma care and general trauma public health care. Both groups were represented by the top two priorities, with the highest ranked question regarding the overall impact of trauma in SA and the second regarding the clinical treatment of open fractures. CONCLUSION: This study has defined research priorities within orthopaedic trauma in South Africa. Our vision is that by establishing consensus on these research priorities, policy and research funding will be directed into these areas. This should ultimately improve musculoskeletal trauma care across South Africa and its significant health and socioeconomic impacts.

The case for decreased surgeon-reported complications due to surgical volume and fellowship status in the treatment of geriatric hip fracture: An analysis of the ABOS database.

INTRODUCTION: American orthopaedists are increasingly seeking fellowship sub-specialization. One proposed benefit of fellowship training is decrease in complications, however, few studies have investigated the rates of medical and surgical complications for hip fracture patients between orthopedists from different fellowship backgrounds. This study aims to investigate the effect of fellowship training and case volume on medical and surgical outcomes of patient following hip fracture surgical intervention. METHODS: 1999-2016 American Board of Orthopedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II Examination Case List data were used to assess patients treated by trauma or adult reconstruction fellowship-trained orthopedists versus all-other orthopaedists. Rates of surgeon-reported medical and surgical adverse events were compared between the three surgeon cohorts. Using binary multivariate logistic regression to control of demographic factors, independent factors were evaluated for their effect on surgical complications. RESULTS: Data from 73,427 patients were assessed. An increasing number of hip fractures are being treated by trauma fellowship trained surgeons (9.43% in 1999-2004 to 60.92% in 2011-2016). In multivariate analysis, there was no significant difference in type of fellowship, however, surgeons with increased case volume saw significantly decreased odds of complications (16-30 cases: OR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.85-0.97; p = 0.003; 31+ cases: OR = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.61-0.76; p<0.001). Femoral neck hip fractures were associated with increased odds of surgical complications. DISCUSSION: Despite minor differences in incidence of surgical complications between different fellowship trained orthopaedists, there is no major difference in overall risk of surgical complications for hip fracture patients based on fellowship status of early orthopaedic surgeons. However, case volume does significantly decrease the risk of surgical complications among these patients and may stand as a proxy for fellowship training. Fellows required to take hip fracture call as part of their training regardless of fellowship status exhibited decreased complication risk for hip fracture patients, thus highlighting the importance of additional training.

The Imperial Joint Line Congruency Measurement is a valuable tool in total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Preservation of joint line height is an important factor in post-operative function after Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). This is the first study investigating the reliability of the novel Imperial Joint Line Congruency Measurement (IJLCM) technique for the assessment of joint line height using plain radiographs. METHODS: The reliability of two techniques used to measure joint line height on pre-operative and post-operative plain radiographs is presented. 120 patients that underwent TKA from 6 different international centres were included. Measurements were performed using each technique by two senior orthopaedic surgeons at two different timepoints (test-retest). Two undergraduate medical students performed joint line measurements using the most reproducible of the two techniques on 40 pre-operative and post-operative images to establish the reliability of the measurement technique. RESULTS: The IJLCM demonstrated an average absolute difference of 1.83mm (CI 1.56-2.10mm) and excellent inter and intra-rater reliability between senior orthopaedic surgeons (>0.92 (CI 0.88-0.94) when measuring joint line height on plain radiographs. Overall Crohnbach's alpha over 0.92 confirmed internal consistency. Measurements performed using the control technique as previously described by Figgie et al. had an average absolute difference of 5.75mm (5.17-6.32mm). Comparison of measurements by senior orthopaedic surgeons and medical students using the IJLCM technique with ANOVA and student's t-test demonstrated acceptable agreement and inter-rater reliability of >0.92 (0.87-0.95). CONCLUSION: This study shows excellent accuracy, precision, and reliability of the novel IJLCM technique. Furthermore, excellent agreement between senior orthopaedic surgeons and medical students when using the IJLCM could be shown. The IJLCM technique is reliable for joint line assessment.

The Renaissance of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty appears rational - A radiograph-based comparative Study on adverse Events and patient-reported Outcomes in 353 TKAs and 98 UKAs.

PURPOSE: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are both considered suitable for antero-medial osteoarthritis and spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee. National registry data are consistent in showing higher revision rates for UKA. Adequately adjusted, these findings may be challenged by differences in adverse events and patient-reported outcomes, as both can have serious long-term implications. Based on preoperative radiographs, the aim was to retrospectively compare the two principle surgeries in these respects. METHODS: All TKA procedures in 2016 in one Swedish county council were, according to certain radiograph-based consensus criteria, visually evaluated for medial UKA suitability. Then, using different regression models, they were compared with the corresponding medial UKAs performed in 2015-2017 regarding complications and patient-reported outcomes one year after surgery. RESULTS: The UKA group showed an 82% reduced risk (OR 0.2; 95% CI 0.0-0.6) of any complications, whereas the 55% reduced risk of severe complication did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.1-2.1). These findings corresponded in high-volume surgeries to an absolute complication rate of 0% in the UKA group and 10% in the TKA group (p = 0.005) and to a severe complication rate of 0% and 5% respectively (p = 0.05). Though no differences were seen in any general patient-reported outcomes, the pain and function based OMERACT-OARSI responder criteria indicated in both around a 60% better chance of any response (OR 1.6 CI % 0.6-4.5) and a high response (OR 1.6; 95% CI 0.7-3.4) in the UKA group. CONCLUSION: No differences were shown in patient-reported outcomes but a clear difference in risk of complications, favoring the UKA procedure.

The Estimated Cost of Maintenance of Certification.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) is a controversial topic in medicine for many different reasons. Studies have suggested that there may be associations between fewer negative outcomes and participation in MOC. However, MOC still remains controversial because of its cost. We sought to determine the estimated cost of MOC to the average orthopaedic surgeon, including fees and time cost, defined as the market value of the physician's time. METHODS: We calculated the total cost of MOC to be the sum of the fees required for applications, examinations, and other miscellaneous fees as well as the time cost to the physician and staff. Costs were calculated for the oral, written, and American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Web-based Longitudinal Assessment (ABOS WLA) MOC pathways based on the responses of 33 orthopaedic surgeons to a survey sent to a state orthopaedic society. RESULTS: We calculated the average orthopaedic surgeon's total cost in time and fees over the decade-long period to be $71,440.61 ($7,144.06 per year) for the oral examination MOC pathway and $80,391.55 ($8,039.16 per year) for the written examination pathway. We calculated the cost of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery web-based examination pathway to be $69,721.04 ($6,972.10 per year). CONCLUSIONS: The actual cost of MOC is much higher than just the fees paid to organizations providing services. The majority of the cost comes in the form of time cost to the physician. The ABOS WLA was implemented to alleviate the anxiety of a high-stakes examination and to encourage efficient longitudinal learning. We found that the ABOS WLA pathway does save time and money when compared with the written examination pathway when review courses and study periods are taken. We believe that future policy changes should focus on decreasing physician time spent completing MOC requirements, and decreasing the cost of these requirements, while preserving the model of continued evidence-based medical education.

The potential for diversion of prescribed opioids among orthopaedic patients: Results of an anonymous patient survey.

INTRODUCTION: Diversion of prescription opioid medication is a contributor to the opioid epidemic. Safe handling practices can reduce the risk of diversion. We aimed to understand: 1) if orthopaedic patients received instructions on how to safely handle opioids, 2) their typical storage/disposal practices, and 3) their willingness to participate in an opioid disposal program (ODP). METHODS: Cross-sectional study of adult orthopaedic patients who completed an anonymous survey on current or past prescription opioid use, instruction on handling, storage and disposal practices, presence of children in the household, and willingness to participate in an ODP. Frequencies and percentages of responses were computed, both overall and stratified by possession of unused opioids. RESULTS: 569 respondents who reported either current or past prescription opioid use were analyzed. 44% reported receiving storage instructions and 56% reported receiving disposal instructions from a health care provider. Many respondents indicated unsafe handling practices: possessing unused opioids (34%), using unsafe storage methods (90%), and using unsafe disposal methods (34%). Respondents with unused opioids were less likely to report receiving handling instructions or using safe handling methods, and 47% of this group reported having minors or young adults in the household. Respondents who received storage and disposal instructions were more likely to report safe storage and disposal methods. Seventy-four percent of respondents reported that they would participate in an ODP. CONCLUSION: While many orthopaedic patients report inadequate education on safe opioid handling and using unsafe handling practices, findings suggest targeted education is associated with better behaviours. However, patients are willing to safely dispose of unused medication if provided a convenient option. These findings suggest a need to address patient knowledge and behavior regarding opioid handling to reduce the risk of opioid diversion.

Radiation Reduction Strategies in Pediatric Orthopaedics.

INTRODUCTION: Pediatric orthopaedic patients have the potential for significant radiation exposure from the use of imaging studies, such as computed tomography and bone scintigraphy. With the potential for long-term treatment, such as is required for scoliosis or osteogenesis imperfecta, patients are at even greater risk of radiation-induced carcinogenesis. DISCUSSION: Although an association between radiation and cancer risk is evident, causation is difficult to prove because comorbidities or genetic predispositions may play a role in the higher baseline rates of malignancy later in life. Efforts have been made over the years to reduce exposure using more modern imaging techniques and simple radiation reduction strategies. Educational efforts and clinical practice guidelines are decreasing the rate of computed tomography scan use in pediatrics. Although considerable work is being done on the development of radiation-free imaging modalities, imaging that uses ionizing radiation will, in the near term, be necessary in specific circumstances to provide optimal care to pediatric orthopaedic patients. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of the ionizing radiation exposure associated with commonly used tests as well as radiation-reduction strategies is essential for the optimal and safe care of pediatric orthopaedic patients.

Cast-Related Complications.

Despite advances in surgical techniques and technology, casting remains an important treatment modality in the armamentarium of orthopedic surgery. Opportunities for skill development and complication management are a decreasing commodity for the surgeon in training. Appropriate indications for casting and technical expertise of cast application are key to complication avoidance. Prompt recognition and evaluation of potential complications are key to optimizing patient outcomes. Following the lead of the American Board of Orthopedic Surgery Resident Skills Modules, we implore teaching institutions to develop and maintain robust teaching programs, skills acquisitions laboratories, and assessments for confirmation of competency for all residency programs.

How Long Will It Take to Reach Gender Parity in Orthopaedic Surgery in the United States? An Analysis of the National Provider Identifier Registry.

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have evaluated how the proportion of women in orthopaedic surgery has changed over time, these analyses have been limited by small sample sizes, have primarily used data on residents, and have not included information on growth across subspecialties and geographic regions. QUESTION/PURPOSE: We used the National Provider Identifier registry to ask: How have the (1) overall, (2) regional, and (3) subspecialty percentages of women among all currently practicing orthopaedic providers changed over time in the United States? METHODS: The National Provider Identifier Registry of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) was queried for all active providers with taxonomy codes pertaining to orthopaedic subspecialties as of April 2020. Women orthopaedic surgeons were identified among all physicians with subspecialty taxonomy codes. As all providers are required to provide a gender when applying for an NPI, all providers with queried taxonomy codes additionally had gender classification. Our final cohort consisted of 31,296 practicing orthopaedic surgeons, of whom 8% (2363 of 31,296) were women. A total of 11,714 (37%) surgeons possessed taxonomy codes corresponding with a specific orthopaedic subspecialty. A univariate linear regression analysis was used to analyze trends in the annual proportions of women who are active orthopaedic surgeons based on NPI enumeration dates. Specifically, annual proportions were defined using cross-sections of the NPI registry on December 31 of each year. Linear regression was similarly used to evaluate changes in the annual proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons across United States Census regions and divisions, as well as orthopaedic subspecialties. The national growth rate was then projected forward to determine the year at which the representation of women orthopaedic surgeons would achieve parity with the proportion of all women physicians (36.3% or 340,018 of 936,254, as determined by the 2019 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile) and the proportion of all women in the United States (50.8% or 166,650,550 of 328,239,523 as determined by 2019 American Community Survey from the United States Census Bureau). Gender parity projections along with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Holt-Winters forecasting algorithm. The proportions of women physicians and women in the United States were assumed to remain fixed at 2019 values of 36.3% and 50.8%, respectively. RESULTS: There was a national increase in the proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons between 2010 and 2019 (r2 = 0.98; p < 0.001) at a compound annual growth rate of 2%. Specifically, the national proportion of orthopaedic surgeons who were women increased from 6% (1670 of 26,186) to 8% (2350 of 30,647). Assuming constant growth at this rate following 2019, the time to achieve gender parity with the overall medical profession (that is, to achieve 36.3% women in orthopaedic surgery) is projected to be 217 years, or by the year 2236. Likewise, the time to achieve gender parity with the overall US population (which is 50.8% women) is projected to be 326 years, or by the year 2354. During our study period, there were increases in the proportion of women orthopaedic surgeons across US Census regions. The lowest growth was in the West (17%) and the South (19%). Similar growth was demonstrated across census divisions. In each orthopaedic subspecialty, we found increases in the proportion of women surgeons throughout the study period. Adult reconstruction (0%) and spine surgery (1%) had the lowest growth. CONCLUSION: We calculate that at the current rate of change, it will take more than 200 years for orthopaedic surgery to achieve gender parity with the overall medical profession. Although some regions and subspecialties have grown at comparably higher rates, collectively, there has been minimal growth across all domains. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Given this meager growth, we believe that substantive changes must be made across all levels of orthopaedic education and leadership to steepen the current curve. These include mandating that all medical school curricula include dedicated exposure to orthopaedic surgery to increase the number of women coming through the orthopaedic pipeline. Additionally, we believe the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and individual programs should require specific benchmarks for the proportion of orthopaedic faculty and fellowship program directors, as well as for the proportion of incoming trainees, who are women. Furthermore, we believe there should be a national effort led by American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and orthopaedic subspecialty societies to foster the academic development of women in orthopaedic surgery while recruiting more women into leadership positions. Future analyses should evaluate the efficacy of diversity efforts among other surgical specialties that have achieved or made greater strides toward gender parity, as well as how these programs can be implemented into orthopaedic surgery.

Effect of malpractice claims on orthopedic and traumatology physicians in Turkey: A survey study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the malpractice claims experienced by orthopedic and traumatology physicians and to determine their effects on burnout, job satisfaction, and clinical practice. METHODS: A questionnaire survey was conducted on orthopedic and traumatology specialists between May 2019 and February 2020. Data collection was carried out via e-survey at "turk-ortopedi" mail group, which is an electronic communication network of orthopedic and traumatology physicians. For data collection, sociodemographic data forms were used including the general characteristics, working conditions, and the malpractice claim events along with the Maslach Burnout Inventory scale to evaluate burnout and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire to investigate job satisfaction. RESULTS: In total, 353 orthopedic and traumatology physicians (348 men, 5 women), including 37 professors, 41 associate professors, and 275 surgeons, completed the questionnaire. In total, 65.4% of the participants (231 physicians and 471 relevant dossiers) stated that they were currently facing a malpractice claim. Emotional burnout and hesitant behavior in medical practices were significantly higher among the physicians who had undergone an investigation/trial with the claim of malpractice (p<0.05), whereas intrinsic job satisfaction was significantly lower (p<0.05). It was determined that orthopedic and traumatology physicians dealing with arthroplasty, vertebral surgery, hand surgery, and foot/ankle surgeries had undergone significantly more trials (p<0.05). In the evaluation of the burnout levels and job satisfaction scores of the physicians according to the age, academic title, seniority, and institution, it was determined that burnout level decreased with age, those between the ages of 25 and 34 years were exhausted the most, and job satisfaction increased with age. It was also found that burnout level decreased and job satisfaction increased as the academic title became higher, and attending physicians were the most exhausted. Moreover, burnout level decreased as seniority increased, the most senior ones were the ones most exhausted, and job satisfaction increased with seniority. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this study has revealed that malpractice claims cause emotional burnout, low intrinsic job satisfaction, and a hesitant behavior in medical practice for the orthopedic and traumatology physicians. The concept of malpractice alone may result in unnecessary analyses/examinations for patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Diagnostic Study.

Standardizing statistics and data reporting in orthopaedic research.

As the demand for research within orthopaedic surgery continues to grow, it is important to emphasize appropriate data reporting. Insufficient statistical reporting confounds data interpretation and makes it difficult to compare results. Currently, there are no guidelines for reporting results within the orthopaedic literature. This article discusses the importance of appropriate data reporting and proposes guidelines for presenting orthopaedic data to highlight clinical relevance rather than statistical significance.

Validation and Implementation of 4-domain Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Tailored for Orthopedic Sports Medicine.

The validation of a 4-domain PROM tailored to orthopedic sports medicine was performed through item generation, item scaling, validity and reliability testing, statistical analysis, as well as item reduction. Conbrach's alpha was used to verify item homogeneity, i. e. their accuracy or consistency. This PROM showed acceptable statistical accuracy and clinical applicability for a variety of surgical treatments, regardless of the anatomical injury sites. Moreover, this PROM considers the athletes' primary physical demands in an non-injured baseline condition, their motivation to continue sports practice and participation, and the influence of sports practice on their quality of life. This 4-domain PROM tailored for orthopedic sports medicine appears to be a valid tool to assess athletes and high-performing practitioners with sports injuries, recording their perception of injury, expectations of treatment; evaluation of postoperative care and treatment received, and perceived outcomes compared to their pre-injury status of physical demands in sports activity. The tool is unique, allowing direct comparisons between athletes' perception of pre-injury baseline, injury, treatment, and outcome. It will be a welcome adjunct to the sports medicine professional's tool box when assessing athlete's status and outcome after injury and intervention.

Interpreting Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) Statement recommends that studies report results beyond p values and include treatment effect(s) and measures of precision (e.g., confidence intervals [CIs]) to facilitate the interpretation of results. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the reporting and interpretation of patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) results in clinical studies from high-impact orthopaedic journals, to determine the proportion of studies that (1) only reported a p value; (2) reported a treatment effect, CI, or minimal clinically important difference (MCID); and (3) offered an interpretation of the results beyond interpreting a p value. METHODS: We included studies from 5 high-impact-factor orthopaedic journals published in 2017 and 2019 that compared at least 2 intervention groups using PROMs. RESULTS: A total of 228 studies were analyzed, including 126 randomized controlled trials, 35 prospective cohort studies, 61 retrospective cohort studies, 1 mixed cohort study, and 5 case-control studies. Seventy-six percent of studies (174) reported p values exclusively to express and interpret between-group differences, and only 22.4% (51) reported a treatment effect (mean difference, mean change, or odds ratio) with 95% CI. Of the 54 studies reporting a treatment effect, 31 interpreted the results using an important threshold (MCID, margin, or Cohen d), but only 3 interpreted the CIs. We found an absolute improvement of 35.5% (95% CI, 20.8% to 48.4%) in the reporting of the MCID between 2017 and 2019. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of interventional studies reporting PROMs do not report CIs around between-group differences in outcome and do not define a clinically meaningful difference. A p value cannot effectively communicate the readiness for implementation in a clinical setting and may be misleading. Thus, reporting requirements should be expanded to require authors to define and provide a rationale for between-group clinically important difference thresholds, and study findings should be communicated by comparing CIs with these thresholds.

Meaningful Clinical Applications of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopaedics.

¼: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) comprise valuable data, when combined with traditional clinical information, for patient-centered health outcome assessment. ¼: While PROMs form the foundation of orthopaedic clinical research, they are invaluable tools for clinical care. ¼: PROMs play a critical role in shared decision-making with patients, as they are quantitative measures of patient health (function, pain, and satisfaction). ¼: PROMs should be incorporated into routine postoperative care for effective clinical monitoring and understanding of the response to surgery. ¼: PROMs can be additionally utilized for meaningful clinical research, predictive analytics, and value-based care delivery pathways.

"Greek KOOS-Child: a valid, disease specific, diagnostically accurate and responsive PROM in children with knee-related pathology".

PURPOSE: The Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)-Child questionnaire is one of the frequently child-friendly measures used in pediatric studies. The aim of this study was to transculturally adapt the Greek version of KOOS-Child and evaluate its clinimetric properties in children with knee disorders. METHODS: Children visiting the Outpatients Orthopaedic Clinic of a Greek Paediatric General Hospital were considered eligible if they were aged 8-14 years, had a knee soft tissue injury and associated physical limitations. The transcultural adaptation was based on a multistage backward translation approach. Participants completed the KOOS-Child at their first visit to the orthopedic specialist (baseline), 2 weeks and 3 months after baseline. Content validity of the KOOS-Child was evaluated using general QoL measures (KIDSCREEN and Kid-KINDL) and construct validity was explored by correlating relevant items. Responsiveness was evaluated according to the children's response on the given orthopeadic treatment. RESULTS: Sample consisted of 59 children (30 males), aged: 11 ± 1.8 years. The KOOS-Child showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's a: 0.80-0.96). Adequate convergent validity with > 75% relevant a priori hypotheses was confirmed. Construct validity was moderate to strong (Pearson's r correlations between related KOOS and Kid-KINDL subdimensions: 0.54-0.62). KOOS and KIDSCREEN subdimensions correlations were fair (Pearson's r correlations: 0.32-0.65). KOOS-Child's diagnostic accuracy was high. Factor analysis extracted height factors accounting for 76.15% of the total variance, confirmed by the scree plot. Responsiveness was moderate to high with Cohen's d from 0.6 to 1.4. CONCLUSION: The Greek version of the KOOS-Child demonstrated excellent internal consistency, good construct validity, diagnostic accuracy and interpretability as well as good responsiveness. The measure could be used across Greek children with orthopaedic knee problems. Generalisability of findings is limited due to the relatively limited cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.