***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: We included 18 trials (1463 participants) in the review. Thirteen trials involved people undergoing hip replacement, three involved people undergoing knee replacement and two included both people with hip and knee replacements. Only six trials reported using an adequate method of allocation concealment, and only two trials blinded participants. Few trials reported sufficient data to analyse the major outcomes of the review (pain, function, health-related quality of life, global assessment, postoperative anxiety, total adverse events and re-operation rate). There did not appear to be an effect of time on any outcome, so we chose to include only the latest time point available per outcome in the review. In people undergoing hip replacement, preoperative education may not offer additional benefits over usual care. The mean postoperative anxiety score at six weeks with usual care was 32.16 on a 60-point scale (lower score represents less anxiety) and was 2.28 points lower with preoperative education (95% confidence interval (CI) -5.68 to 1.12; 3 RCTs, 264 participants, low-quality evidence), an absolute risk difference of -4% (95% CI -10% to 2%). The mean pain score up to three months postoperatively with usual care was 3.1 on a 10-point scale (lower score represents less pain) and was 0.34 points lower with preoperative education (95% CI -0.94 to 0.26; 3 RCTs, 227 participants; low-quality evidence), an absolute risk difference of -3% (95% CI -9% to 3%). The mean function score at 3 to 24 months postoperatively with usual care was 18.4 on a 68-point scale (lower score represents better function) and was 4.84 points lower with preoperative education (95% CI -10.23 to 0.66; 4 RCTs, 177 participants; low-quality evidence), an absolute risk difference of -7% (95% CI -15% to 1%). The number of people reporting adverse events, such as infection and deep vein thrombosis, did not differ between groups, but the effect estimates are uncertain due to very low quality evidence (23% (17/75) reported events with usual care versus 18% (14/75) with preoperative education; risk ratio (RR) 0.79; 95% CI 0.19 to 3.21; 2 RCTs, 150 participants). Health-related quality of life, global assessment of treatment success and re-operation rates were not reported. In people undergoing knee replacement, preoperative education may not offer additional benefits over usual care. The mean pain score at 12 months postoperatively with usual care was 80 on a 100-point scale (lower score represents less pain) and was 2 points lower with preoperative education (95% CI -3.45 to 7.45; 1 RCT, 109 participants), an absolute risk difference of -2% (95% CI -4% to 8%). The mean function score at 12 months postoperatively with usual care was 77 on a 100-point scale (lower score represents better function) and was no different with preoperative education (0; 95% CI -5.63 to 5.63; 1 RCT, 109 participants), an absolute risk difference of 0% (95% CI -6% to 6%). The mean health-related quality of life score at 12 months postoperatively with usual care was 41 on a 100-point scale (lower score represents worse quality of life) and was 3 points lower with preoperative education (95% CI -6.38 to 0.38; 1 RCT, 109 participants), an absolute risk difference of -3% (95% CI -6% to 1%). The number of people reporting adverse events, such as infection and deep vein thrombosis, did not differ between groups (18% (11/60) reported events with usual care versus 13% (7/55) with preoperative education; RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.29 to 1.66; 1 RCT, 115 participants), an absolute risk difference of -6% (-19% to 8%). Global assessment of treatment success, postoperative anxiety and re-operation rates were not reported. Although preoperative education is embedded in the consent process, we are unsure if it offers benefits over usual care in terms of reducing anxiety, or in surgical outcomes, such as pain, function and adverse events. Preoperative education may represent a useful adjunct, with low risk of undesirable effects, particularly in certain patients, for example people with depression, anxiety or unrealistic expectations, who may respond well to preoperative education that is stratified according to their physical, psychological and social need.
Output:

This summary of a Cochrane review presents what we know from research on whether preoperative education improves outcomes (e.g. pain, function) compared with usual care in people receiving hip or knee replacement. After searching for all relevant studies to May 2013, we included nine new studies since the last review, giving a total of 18 studies (1463 participants); 13 trials included 1074 people (73% of the total) undergoing hip replacement, three involved people undergoing knee replacement and two included both people with hip and knee replacements. Most participants were women (59%) and the mean age of participants was within the range of 58 to 73 years Postoperative anxiety (lower scores mean less anxiety): People with hip replacement who had preoperative education had postoperative anxiety at six weeks that was 2.28 points lower (ranging from 5.68 points lower to 1.12 points higher) (4% absolute improvement, ranging from 10% improvement to 2% worsening). - People who had usual care for hip replacement rated their postoperative anxiety score as 32.16 points on a scale of 20 to 80 points. Pain (lower scores mean less pain): People with hip replacement who had preoperative education had pain at up to three months that was 0.34 points lower (ranging from 0.94 points lower to 0.26 points higher) (3% absolute improvement, ranging from 9% improvement to 3% worsening). - People who had usual care for hip replacement rated their pain score as 3.1 points on a scale of 0 to 10 points. Function (lower scores mean better function or less disability): People with hip replacement who had preoperative education had function at 3 to 24 months that was 4.84 points lower (ranging from 10.23 points lower to 0.66 points higher) (7% absolute improvement, ranging from 15% improvement to 1% worsening). - People who had usual care for hip replacement rated their function score as 18.4 points on a scale of 0 to 68 points. Side effects: About 5 fewer people out of 100 had adverse events (such as infection or deep vein thrombosis) with preoperative education compared with usual care but this estimate is uncertain. - 18 out of 100 people reported adverse events with preoperative education for hip replacement. - 23 out of 100 people reported adverse events with usual care for hip replacement. This review shows that in people receiving hip or knee replacement who are provided with preoperative education: There is low-quality evidence suggesting that preoperative education may not improve pain, function, health-related quality of life and postoperative anxiety any more than usual care. Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in these estimates and is likely to change the estimates. Health-related quality of life, global assessment of treatment success and re-operation rates were not reported. We are uncertain whether preoperative education results in any fewer adverse events, such as infection or deep vein thrombosis, compared with usual care, due to the very low quality evidence.