How we work
Editorial and medical review policy
We publish health information for people recovering from shoulder surgery. That comes with obligations, and this page sets out exactly how we meet them — including the awkward part, which is that we also sell a pillow.
The four rules we write by
Your care team outranks us
Every guide states it and we mean it: if anything we publish contradicts your surgeon or physiotherapist, follow them. Protocols differ for good clinical reasons.
Sources, not vibes
Clinical claims are traced to NHS trust guidance, NICE, GOV.UK or peer-reviewed research, and listed at the foot of each article so you can check them yourself.
Ranges, not false precision
Where UK practice varies — and for shoulder surgery it varies a lot — we say so and give the range, rather than inventing a single confident number.
We correct ourselves
Research overturned several things we initially believed while writing these guides. We changed the articles rather than the evidence.
How an article gets written
We start from the questions patients actually search for, not from the product. We then research each claim against primary sources: NHS trust patient leaflets, NICE guidance, GOV.UK for anything legal or financial, and peer-reviewed literature for clinical data. Where trusts disagree with each other — which happens more than you'd expect, including on how long you wear a sling — we show the disagreement instead of picking whichever answer suits us.
Before publication, the clinical content is reviewed by a qualified clinician. Reviewed articles carry a 'Medically reviewed by' line in the byline naming the reviewer and their credentials. Articles that are purely practical or legal, rather than clinical, are not given a medical-review badge — we don't apply the label decoratively.
Every article carries a visible last-updated date. We revisit guides when guidance changes; the Statutory Sick Pay rules changing in April 2026 is exactly the kind of change that sends us back through the archive.
The conflict of interest, stated plainly
We sell the Shoulder Sleeper Pillow™. That's a real conflict of interest in health content, and pretending otherwise would be worse than naming it.
How we handle it: each article carries at most one product module, placed where it's genuinely relevant rather than repeated down the page. Clinical guidance never bends towards the product — where the honest answer is 'a folded pillow does this job', we say so, and NHS pillow guidance appears in our articles quoted directly. We don't claim the pillow treats anything: it is a sleep-support and positioning product, not a medical device and not a treatment.
If you think a guide reads as a sales pitch rather than an answer, tell us. That's a bug.
What we will not publish
- Claims that our products speed healing, cure conditions or replace medical treatment
- Invented statistics, or figures we can't trace to a named source
- Reviews or testimonials that aren't real and verified
- Timelines presented as universal when UK practice actually varies
- Advice that would encourage anyone to deviate from their surgeon's protocol
Spotted something wrong?
If you're a clinician or a patient and something we've published is inaccurate or out of date, we want to know — we'd rather be corrected than confident.
Tell us