scholarly journals Is there enough evidence to support hip capsular reconstruction? A systematic review of biomechanical studies

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hari K Ankem ◽  
Vivian W Ouyang ◽  
Benjamin R Saks ◽  
Andrew E Jimenez ◽  
Payam W Sabetian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Rotational Stability ◽  
Defect State ◽  
Effective Force ◽  
Cadaver Studies ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Distraction Force ◽  
Cadaveric Model ◽  
Capsular Defect

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to review and summarize the available biomechanical data on hip capsular reconstruction to guide clinical decision-making. A literature search was completed in December 2020 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify biomechanical cadaver studies on hip capsular reconstruction, hip capsulectomy or hip capsular defect. The investigated parameters included maximum distraction force, capsular state affecting range of motion (ROM), rotation and translation. Four studies met al. the inclusion–exclusion criteria. The median effective force for resisting maximum distraction for the reconstruction state, capsular defect state and the intact state was 171, 111 and 206 N, respectively. The defect capsule force was significantly lower (P = 0.00438) than the intact capsule force. The reconstruction state had a higher distraction force than that of the capsular defect, but due to heterogeneity, the overall effect size was not statistically significant. The capsular reconstruction state reduced excess motion and the degree of instability compared to the capsular defect state but restored the hip close to its native capsular state in the cadaveric model. When compared to capsulectomy/defect state, hip capsular reconstruction significantly improved the rotational stability and effective force at maximum distraction and minimized translation. However, no conclusions can be made regarding the most effective protocol due to the high heterogeneity between the four studies. Further biomechanical studies are needed to test various types of grafts under the same protocol.

Biomechanical Analysis of Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit in a Cadaveric Model

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akash Gupta ◽  
Jeffrey Gates ◽  
Michelle H. McGarry ◽  
James E. Tibone ◽  
Thay Q. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Glenohumeral Joint ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Biomechanical Analysis ◽  
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit ◽  
Posterior Translation ◽  
Throwers Shoulder ◽  
Cadaveric Model

Overhead throwing athletes have been shown to develop adaptive changes in humeral rotation to allow for higher throwing velocities. This manifests as an increase in humeral external rotation and a decrease in internal rotation, which is called glenohumeral internal rotation deficit (GIRD). The percentage of GIRD that significantly affects glenohumeral joint kinematics is not known. The objective of the study was to create a throwers shoulder model with fixed percentages of GIRD to determine at which point kinematic changes start occurring. The results showed that there was a significant decrease in posterior translation starting at 10% GIRD. With inferior translational loads, significantly less inferior translation starts occurring at 20% GIRD. The humeral head apex position at maximum external rotation moves superiorly, posteriorly and laterally, with significant changes in the superior direction occurring with 10% GIRD onwards. Overall, significant kinematic changes begin at 10% GIRD and this should be taken into account for clinical decision-making as to when intervention is necessary.

scholarly journals Improving the Estimation of Subgroup Effects for Clinical Trial Participants with Multimorbidity by Incorporating Drug Class-Level Information in Bayesian Hierarchical Models: A Simulation Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 0272989X2110295
Author(s):  
Laurie J. Hannigan ◽  
David M. Phillippo ◽  
Peter Hanlon ◽  
Laura Moss ◽  
Elaine W. Butterly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Hierarchical Models ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Bayesian Hierarchical Models ◽  
World Health ◽  
Bayesian Hierarchical ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Subgroup Effects

Background There is limited guidance for using common drug therapies in the context of multimorbidity. In part, this is because their effectiveness for patients with specific comorbidities cannot easily be established using subgroup analyses in clinical trials. Here, we use simulations to explore the feasibility and implications of concurrently estimating effects of related drug treatments in patients with multimorbidity by partially pooling subgroup efficacy estimates across trials. Methods We performed simulations based on the characteristics of 161 real clinical trials of noninsulin glucose-lowering drugs for diabetes, estimating subgroup effects for patients with a hypothetical comorbidity across related trials in different scenarios using Bayesian hierarchical generalized linear models. We structured models according to an established ontology—the World Health Organization Anatomic Chemical Therapeutic Classifications—allowing us to nest all trials within drugs and all drugs within anatomic chemical therapeutic classes, with effects partially pooled at each level of the hierarchy. In a range of scenarios, we compared the performance of this model to random effects meta-analyses of all drugs individually. Results Hierarchical, ontology-based Bayesian models were unbiased and accurately recovered simulated comorbidity-drug interactions. Compared with single-drug meta-analyses, they offered a relative increase in precision of up to 250% in some scenarios because of information sharing across the hierarchy. Because of the relative precision of the approaches, a large proportion of small subgroup effects was detectable only using the hierarchical model. Conclusions By assuming that similar drugs may have similar subgroup effects, Bayesian hierarchical models based on structures defined by existing ontologies can be used to improve the precision of treatment efficacy estimates in patients with multimorbidity, with potential implications for clinical decision making.

scholarly journals Revealing HIV viral load patterns using unsupervised machine learning and cluster summarization

F1000Research ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 1144
Author(s):  
Samir A. Farooq ◽  
Samuel J. Weisenthal ◽  
Melissa Trayhan ◽  
Robert J. White ◽  
Kristen Bush ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Viral Load ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
High Viral Load ◽  
Outcome Variable ◽  
Viral Load Suppression ◽  
Hiv Viral Load ◽  
Centroid Algorithm ◽  
Meta Analyses

HIV RNA viral load (VL) is an important outcome variable in studies of HIV infected persons. There exists only a handful of methods which classify patients by VL patterns.  Most methods place limits on the use of viral load measurements, are often specific to a particular study design, and do not account for complex, temporal variation. To address this issue, we propose a set of four unambiguous computable characteristics (features) of time-varying HIV viral load patterns, along with a novel centroid-based classification algorithm, which we use to classify a population of 1,576 HIV positive clinic patients into one of five different viral load patterns (clusters) often found in the literature: durably suppressed viral load (DSVL), sustained low viral load (SLVL), sustained high viral load (SHVL), high viral load suppression (HVLS), and rebounding viral load (RVL). The centroid algorithm summarizes these clusters in terms of their centroids and radii. We show that this allows new VL patterns to be assigned pattern membership based on the distance from the centroid relative to its radius, which we term radial normalization classification. This method has the benefit of providing an objective and quantitative method to assign VL pattern membership with a concise and interpretable model that aids clinical decision making. This method also facilitates meta-analyses by providing computably distinct HIV categories. Finally we propose that this novel centroid algorithm could also be useful in the areas of cluster comparison for outcomes research and data reduction in machine learning.

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of prognosis research studies

2019 ◽  
pp. 208-244
Author(s):  
Richard D Riley ◽  
Karel GM Moons ◽  
Thomas PA Debray ◽  
Douglas G Altman ◽  
Gary S Collins
Keyword(s):  
Prognostic Factor ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Included Study ◽  
Prognosis Research ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Research Studies

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses identify, evaluate, and summarize prognosis research studies and their findings. The chapter provides a guide to the key components and methods for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis for each of the four types of prognosis studies. The CHARMS checklist is introduced as a guide to identifying clear review objectives and design, and to extracting the relevant information from each included study. Many existing prognosis studies are at high risk of bias, because (for example) of selective recruitment and reporting. Tools for examining quality of studies are discussed—the QUIPS for prognostic factor research and PROBAST for prognostic model research. The statistical principles of meta-analysis are described, and the key statistics that can be synthesized are outlined. Challenges are identified, such as the potential for publication bias and substantial heterogeneity in published prognostic factor cut points and methods of prognostic factor measurement. Despite these challenges the chapter emphasizes the crucial importance of prognosis reviews for evidence-based guidelines and clinical decision making.

scholarly journals Review of Systematic Reviews on Acute Procedural Pain in Children in the Hospital Setting

2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Stinson ◽  
Janet Yamada ◽  
Alison Dickson ◽  
Jasmine Lamba ◽  
Bonnie Stevens
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Acute Pain ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Hospitalized Children ◽  
Assessment Measure ◽  
Cochrane Database ◽  
Meta Analyses

BACKGROUND: Acute pain is a common experience for hospitalized children. Despite mounting research on treatments for acute procedure-related pain, it remains inadequately treated.OBJECTIVE: To critically appraise all systematic reviews on the effectiveness of acute procedure-related pain management in hospitalized children.METHODS: Published systematic reviews and meta-analyses on pharmacological and nonpharmacological management of acute procedure-related pain in hospitalized children aged one to 18 years were evaluated. Electronic searches were conducted in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PsycINFO. Two reviewers independently selected articles for review and assessed their quality using a validated seven-point quality assessment measure. Any disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer.RESULTS: Of 1469 published articles on interventions for acute pain in hospitalized children, eight systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. However, only five of these reviews were of high quality. Critical appraisal of pharmacological pain interventions indicated that amethocaine was superior to EMLA (AstraZeneca Canada Inc) for reducing needle pain. Distraction and hypnosis were nonpharmacological interventions effective for management of acute procedure-related pain in hospitalized children.CONCLUSIONS: There is growing evidence of rigorous evaluations of both pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies for acute procedure-related pain in children; however, the evidence underlying some commonly used strategies is limited. The present review will enable the creation of a future research plan to facilitate clinical decision making and to develop clinical policy for managing acute procedure-related pain in children.

scholarly journals A71 RECOMMENDATION REVERSALS IN GASTROENTEROLOGY CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 34-37
Author(s):  
R Gholami ◽  
N Gimpaya ◽  
R Khan ◽  
M A Scaffidi ◽  
R Bansal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Epidemiologic Study ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Accepted Practice ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Quality Evidence

Abstract Background Clinical practice guidelines are evidence-based resources designed to inform clinical decision making. Often, superior evidence will support the inclusion of novel procedures and practices to replace older recommendations. Recommendation reversals occur when (a) superior quality evidence emerges to suggest the harm or non-beneficence of prior recommendations, and (b) that recommendation is not supplanted by a newer one. Aims The primary objective of this study was to describe the content, frequency and rationale for recommendation reversals in CPGs published by gastroenterological societies. Methods For this meta-epidemiologic study, we considered two criteria to define a recommendation reversal: (a) the more recent CPG makes a recommendation that contradicts a previously accepted practice; and (b) the prior recommendation is not replaced by any novel intervention. We searched CPGs published by 20 major GI societies from 1991- 2019. Guidelines were included if had at least two iterations with the same title and used a valid evidence rating system (such as GRADE). Explicit recommendations which reported definite levels of evidence and strength of recommendation were extracted. Results We identified 1022 clinical guidelines from GI societies over 28 years. 292 CPGs were included for data synthesis. 5985 explicit statements were extracted. 12 reversals were confirmed and are summarized in the Table. Six reversals (50.0%) occurred due to studies reporting non-beneficence and 3 (25.0%) occrred due to studies reporting harm. Three recommendations (25.0%) were reversed due to new clinical trials; 3 (25.0%) due to systematic reviews or meta-analyses; and 2 to conform with CPGs of other societies (16.7%). Conclusions We describe recommendation reversals made in gastroenterology CPGs, and the reasons thereof. Investigation of recommendation reversals allows for the identification of low-value medical practices. This reinforces the need for GI CPG committees to (1) iteratively review guidelines to re-evaluate recommendations made on low-quality evidence and; (2) refrain from making recommendations when evidence for the same is weak. Funding Agencies None

scholarly journals Meta-analyses in paediatric surgery are often fragile: implications and consequences

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-367
Author(s):  
Arne Schröder ◽  
Oliver J. Muensterer ◽  
Christina Oetzmann von Sochaczewski
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Paediatric Surgery ◽  
Fragility Index ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Surgical Condition

Abstract Purpose Meta-analyses occupy the highest level of evidence and thereby guide clinical decision-making. Recently, randomised-controlled trials were evaluated for the robustness of their findings by calculating the fragility index. The fragility index is the number of events that needs to be added to one treatment arm until the statistical significance collapses. We, therefore, aimed to evaluate the robustness of paediatric surgical meta-analyses. Methods We searched MEDLINE for paediatric surgical meta-analyses in the last decade. All meta-analyses on a paediatric surgical condition were eligible for analysis if they based their conclusion on a statistically significant meta-analysis. Results We screened 303 records and conducted a full-text evaluation of 60 manuscripts. Of them, 39 were included in our analysis that conducted 79 individual meta-analyses with significant results. Median fragility index was 5 (Q25–Q75% 2–11). Median fragility in relation to included patients was 0.77% (Q25–Q75% 0.29–1.87%). Conclusion Paediatric surgical meta-analyses are often fragile. In almost 60% of results, the statistical significance depends on less than 1% of the included population. However, as the fragility index is just a transformation of the P value, it basically conveys the same information in a different format. It therefore should be avoided.

scholarly journals Critical appraisal and meta-analysis of biological variation estimates for kidney related analytes

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels Jonker ◽  
Berna Aslan ◽  
Beatriz Boned ◽  
Fernando Marqués-García ◽  
Carmen Ricós ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Biological Variation ◽  
Plasma Albumin ◽  
Literature Searches ◽  
Global Estimates ◽  
Correct Application ◽  
Meta Analyses

AbstractObjectiveKidney markers are some of the most frequently used laboratory tests in patient care, and correct clinical decision making depends upon knowledge and correct application of biological variation (BV) data. The aim of this study was to review available BV data and to provide updated BV estimates for the following kidney markers in serum and plasma; albumin, creatinine, cystatin C, chloride, potassium, sodium and urea.ContentRelevant studies were identified from a historical BV database as well as by systematic literature searches. Retrieved publications were appraised by the Biological Variation Data Critical Appraisal Checklist (BIVAC). Meta-analyses of BIVAC compliant studies with similar design were performed to deliver global estimates of within-subject (CVI) and between-subject (CVG) BV estimates. Out of the 61 identified papers, three received a BIVAC grade A, four grade B, 48 grade C, five grade D grade and one was not appraised as it did not report numerical BV estimates. Most studies were identified for creatinine (n=48). BV estimates derived from the meta-analysis were in general lower than previously reported estimates for all analytes except urea. For some measurands, BV estimates may be influenced by age or states of health, but further data are required.SummaryThis review provides updated global BV estimates for kidney related measurands. For all measurands except for urea, these estimates were lower than previously reported.OutlookFor the measurands analyzed in this review, there are sufficient well-designed studies available to publish a trustworthy estimate of BV. However, for a number of newly appearing kidney markers no suitable data is available and additional studies are required.

scholarly journals Methods for the Development of Healthcare Practice Recommendations Using Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Platz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Practice Recommendations ◽  
Meta Analyses

Quality of healthcare can be improved when the best external evidence available is integrated in clinical decision-making in a systematic explicit manner. With the rapid expansion of clinical evidence, the opportunities for evidence-based high-quality healthcare increase. Paradoxically, the likelihood of any one person to get a complete and balanced picture of the evidence available decreases. This is especially true for rehabilitation interventions that are complex in nature and where clinical research is rather diverse. Given the complex nature of the evidence, there is a substantial risk of misinterpreting the complex information both at the level of individual sources (e.g., reports of clinical trials) and for aggregated data syntheses (e.g., systematic reviews and meta-analyses). These risks are inherent in these sources themselves and are in addition related to the methodological expertise necessary to make valid use of the evidence for clinical decision-making. Taken together, there is a great demand for systematic structured guidance from evidence to clinical decision. This methodology paper describes a structured process for the development and report of evidence-based clinical practice recommendations that uses systematic reviews and meta-analyses as evidence source. It provides a comprehensive framework with specific requirements for the development group, the formulation of the healthcare question addressed, the systematic search for the evidence, its critical appraisal, the extraction and the outcome-centered presentation of the evidence, the rating of its quality, strengths and weaknesses, any further considerations relevant for decision-making, and an explicit recommendation statement along with its justification, implementation, and resource aspects. The suggested methodology uses international standards in evidence synthesis, critical appraisal of systematic reviews, rating the quality of evidence, characteristics of recommendations, and guideline development as developed by Cochrane, GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation), AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews), and AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation). An added distinctive feature of the methodology is to focus on the most up-to-date, most valid evidence and hence to support the development of valid practice recommendations in an efficient way. Practice recommendations generated by such a valid methodology would be generally applicable and promote evidence-based clinical practice globally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document