First, do no harm
I have subscribed to JAVMA for 39 years. During that time, it has connected me to colleagues, brought news of scientific and clinical advances, and helped me find jobs and hire associates. Through all this time I have looked to JAVMA to establish and maintain the standards of news reporting in our profession. Therefore, it was with surprise, sadness, and disappointment that I read the article about Dr. James Cook in the June 15, 2021, issue.1
The article on Dr. Cook references lay publications that were factually incorrect. The article quotes Kaiser Health News, a lay news source, as stating “plaintiffs were not informed of the 86% failure rate of the BioJoint restoration.” Had the author fact-checked these statements, they would have found peer-reviewed, published data stating the Bio-Joint knee restoration procedure, which is the subject of the article, has an overall success rate consistently > 84% and 3- to 4-year functional survival rates of 89%.2–6 In the younger, often more traumatically complex patients considered for BioJoint procedures, this technique has a greater long-term success rate than the more well-known and standard TKA procedure.7 The BioJoint procedure has over a decade of evidence-based science featuring over 30 articles in peer-reviewed publications behind its development and implementation.
Innovative change is disruptive and often challenges the status quo. It is also how the greatest advances in our profession have occurred. Dr. Cook and his colleagues pioneered a technique in dogs that has been translated to human medicine and has helped soldiers and young trauma victims as well as moms, dads, athletes, and veterinarians return to function—and to life. It is an outstanding example of One Health, One Medicine. That is a topic that would bear up to evidence-based reporting.
It is a standard of all health-care professions to first, do no harm. Shouldn't this statement apply to the way we treat our colleagues as well? My hope in writing this letter is that it might give future authors pause to research and check facts before publishing statements that are sensational and defamatory.
Arleigh J. Reynolds, dvm, phd
Director, Center for One Health Research, Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research, Professor of Clinical Nutrition, Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska
References
- 1. ↑
News. Veterinarian named in settlement over human knee surgeries. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2021;258:1302.
- 2. ↑
Stoker AM, Stannard JP, Kuroki K, et al. Validation of the Missouri Osteochondral Allograft Preservation System for the maintenance of osteochondral allograft quality during prolonged storage. Am J Sports Med 2018;46:58–65.
- 3.
Stannard JP, Cook JL. Prospective assessment outcomes after primary unipolar, multisurface, and bipolar osteochondral allograft transplantations in the knee: a comparison of 2 preservation methods. Am J Sports Med 2020;48:1356–1364.
- 4.
Rucinski K, Stannard JP, Crecelius C, et al. Changes in knee range of motion after large osteochondral allograft transplantations. Knee 2021;28:207–213.
- 5.
Rucinski K, Cook JL, Crecelius CR, et al. Effects of compliance with procedure-specific postoperative rehabilitation protocols on initial outcomes after osteochondral and meniscal allograft transplantation in the knee. Orthop J Sports Med 2019;7:2325967119884291.
- 6. ↑
Cook JL, Rucinski K, Crecelius CR, et al. Return to sport after large single-surface, multisurface, or bipolar osteochondral allograft transplantation in the knee using shell grafts. Orthop J Sports Med 2021;9:2325967120967928.
- 7. ↑
Bayliss LE, Culliford D, Monk AP, et al. The effect of patient age at intervention on risk of implant revision after total replacement of the hip or knee: a population-based cohort study. Lancet 2017;389:1424–1430.
JAVMA News responds:
Thank you for sharing your perspective with us—we value hearing from our members and welcome the diverse perspectives that exist across our community.
JAVMA News is committed to producing credible, timely, and informative perspectives for the veterinary community. In this case, the fact that the University of Missouri agreed to a $16.2 million settlement earlier this year to resolve 13 lawsuits related to claims of false advertising and personal injury connected to the University of Missouri BioJoint Center is newsworthy and of interest to our readers. The Missouri Supreme Court recently transferred the case back to the Missouri Court of Appeals because the appeals court initially did not take up the case against the University of Missouri Board of Curators and Drs. Stannard and Cook. Therefore, the story is ongoing and we will continue to monitor for updates.
To ensure credibility in our reporting, we used news coverage and court documents. We also included the plaintiffs' allegations to give context for why the lawsuits were filed but clearly identified those allegations as such and not as unassailable facts. The studies you cite regarding success rates are interesting, but they are not referenced on the Mizzou BioJoint Center website. In fact, the website does not make any claims regarding the success rates of its procedures. Additionally, we reached out to Dr. Cook and the university for comment prior to publication, with ample time for a response. We included the university's response, but unfortunately did not hear back from Dr. Cook until after the story was printed. We value you as a member, and we thank you for sharing your perspective with us.
Malinda Larkin
Senior News Editor, AVMA
