scholarly journals Evidence first, practice second in arthroscopic surgery: use of placebo surgery in randomised controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (12) ◽  
pp. 757-760
Author(s):  
Kazuha Kizaki ◽  
Lisa J Schwartz ◽  
Olufemi R Ayeni

The application of evidence-based medicine helps clinicians avoid unnecessary procedures and decreases unnecessary harm for future patients while sparing economic burdens. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) most accurately produce best research evidence. In arthroscopic surgery, however, many procedures have been extensively used without supportive evidence verified with RCTs. In this paper, we introduce two procedures (arthroscopic partial menisectomy for degenerative knees and arthroscopic subacromial decompression for subacromial pain syndrome), where over 30 years of procedure usage has continued prior to garnering evidence for the inefficacy of the procedures. The situations are attributed to the fact that clinical trials in arthroscopic surgeries are challenging given the use of placebo controls. A placebo-control RCT can accurately answer research questions about efficacy and safety of surgical procedures; however, the majority of arthroscopic surgeries in practice have not been rigorously tested against placebo surgeries. This is because preparing surgical placebo controls, known as sham surgeries, are ethically controversial. Also considering that high-quality study results often do not change clinical practice due to insufficient knowledge translation, the benefits of such trials may be uncertain to society at large. Additionally, there are a lack of clear guidelines for conducting arthroscopic placebo surgeries in RCTs. We hope that this article helps drive discussion about appropriate use of placebo surgeries in RCTs to produce the best quality evidence in arthroscopic surgery.

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e044833
Author(s):  
Gabriel Silver ◽  
Yordanka Krastev ◽  
Miriam K Forbes ◽  
Brenton Hamdorf ◽  
Barry Lewis ◽  
...  

IntroductionPerfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a diverse group of compounds that have been used in hundreds of industrial applications and consumer products including aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) for many years. Multiple national and international health and environmental agencies have accepted that PFAS exposures are associated with numerous adverse health effects. Australian firefighters have been shown to have elevated levels of PFAS in their blood, specifically perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorohexane sulfonic acid (PFHxS), due to the historical use of AFFF. While PFAS concentrations decline over time once the source of exposure has been removed, their potential adverse health effects are such that it would be prudent to develop an intervention to lower levels at a faster rate than occurs via natural elimination rates.Methods and analysisThis is a randomised controlled trial of current and former Australian firefighters in the Metropolitan Fire Brigade/Fire Rescue Victoria, and contractors, with previous occupational exposure to PFAS and baseline elevated PFOS levels. The study is investigating whether whole blood donation every 12 weeks or plasma donation every 6 weeks will significantly reduce PFAS levels, compared with a control group. We have used covariate-adaptive randomisation to balance participants’ sex and blood PFAS levels between the three groups and would consider a 25% reduction in serum PFOS and PFHxS levels to be potentially clinically significant after 12 months of whole blood or plasma donation. A secondary analysis of health biomarkers is being made of changes between screening and week 52 in all three groups.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number: 3855), final protocol V.2 dated 12 June 2019. Study results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and presentations at conferences.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000204145).


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042953
Author(s):  
Martin John Connor ◽  
Taimur Tariq Shah ◽  
Katarzyna Smigielska ◽  
Emily Day ◽  
Johanna Sukumar ◽  
...  

IntroductionSurvival in men diagnosed with de novo synchronous metastatic prostate cancer has increased following the use of upfront systemic treatment, using chemotherapy and other novel androgen receptor targeted agents, in addition to standard androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Local cytoreductive and metastasis-directed interventions are hypothesised to confer additional survival benefit. In this setting, IP2-ATLANTA will explore progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes with the addition of sequential multimodal local and metastasis-directed treatments compared with standard care alone.MethodsA phase II, prospective, multicentre, three-arm randomised controlled trial incorporating an embedded feasibility pilot. All men with new histologically diagnosed, hormone-sensitive, metastatic prostate cancer, within 4 months of commencing ADT and of performance status 0 to 2 are eligible. Patients will be randomised to Control (standard of care (SOC)) OR Intervention 1 (minimally invasive ablative therapy to prostate±pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND)) OR Intervention 2 (cytoreductive radical prostatectomy±PLND OR prostate radiotherapy±pelvic lymph node radiotherapy (PLNRT)). Metastatic burden will be prespecified using the Chemohormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease (CHAARTED) definition. Men with low burden disease in intervention arms are eligible for metastasis-directed therapy, in the form of stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) or surgery. Standard systemic therapy will be administered in all arms with ADT±upfront systemic chemotherapy or androgen receptor agents. Patients will be followed-up for a minimum of 2 years. Primary outcome: PFS. Secondary outcomes include predictive factors for PFS and overall survival; urinary, sexual and rectal side effects. Embedded feasibility sample size is 80, with 918 patients required in the main phase II component. Study recruitment commenced in April 2019, with planned follow-up completed by April 2024.Ethics and disseminationApproved by the Health Research Authority (HRA) Research Ethics Committee Wales-5 (19/WA0005). Study results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT03763253; ISCRTN58401737


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e046561
Author(s):  
Chantal Camden ◽  
Jill G Zwicker ◽  
Melanie Morin ◽  
Tibor Schuster ◽  
Melanie Couture ◽  
...  

IntroductionMild motor difficulties in children are underdiagnosed despite being highly prevalent, leaving such children often underserved and at higher risk for secondary consequences such as cardiovascular disease and anxiety. Evidence suggests that early patient-oriented interventions, coaching parents and providing children with early stimulation should be provided, even in the absence of a diagnosis. Such interventions may be effectively delivered via telerehabilitation.Methods and analysisA family-centred, pragmatic randomised controlled trial will be carried out to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of a Web-based Early intervention for Children using multimodAl REhabilitation (WECARE). Families of children with motor difficulties, 3–8 years of age, living in Quebec, Canada, and receiving no public rehabilitation services (n=118) will be asked to determine up to 12 performance goals, evaluated using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM, the primary outcome). Families will be randomised to receive either usual care or the WECARE intervention. The WECARE intervention will be delivered for 1 year via a web-based platform. Families will have access to videoconferences with an assigned rehabilitation therapist using a collaborative coaching approach, a private chat function, a forum open to all intervention arm participants and online resources pertaining to child development. Participants will be asked to re-evaluate the child’s COPM performance goals every 3 months up to 1 year post allocation. The COPM results will be analysed using a mixed Poisson regression model. Secondary outcomes include measures of the child’s functional ability, parental knowledge and skills and health-related quality of life, as well as qualitative outcomes pertaining to parental satisfaction and service delivery trajectories. Investigators and quantitative data analysts will be blinded to group allocation.Ethics and disseminationThe CIUSSS de l’Estrie—CHUS ethics committee approved this trial (2020-3429). Study results will be communicated via peer-reviewed journal publications, conference presentations and stakeholder-specific knowledge transfer activities.Trial registration numberNCT04254302.


BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e017436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Søren Thorgaard Skou ◽  
Martin Lind ◽  
Per Hölmich ◽  
Hans Peter Jensen ◽  
Carsten Jensen ◽  
...  

IntroductionArthroscopic surgery is a very common orthopaedic procedure. While several trials have investigated the effect of knee arthroscopy for middle-aged and older patients with meniscal tears, there is a paucity of trials comparing meniscal surgery with non-surgical treatment for younger adults. The aim of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) is to investigate if early arthroscopic surgery is superior to exercise therapy and education, with the option of later surgery if needed, in improving pain, function and quality of life in younger adults with meniscal tears.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a multicentre, parallel-group RCT conducted at six hospitals across all five healthcare regions in Denmark. 140 patients aged 18–40 years with a clinical history and symptoms consistent with a meniscal tear, verified on MRI, found eligible for meniscal surgery by an orthopaedic surgeon will be randomly allocated to one of two groups (1:1 ratio). Participants randomised to surgery will undergo either arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or meniscal repair followed by standard postsurgical care, while participants allocated to exercise and education will undergo a 12-week individualised, supervised neuromuscular and strengthening exercise programme and patient education. The primary outcome will be difference in change from baseline to 12 months in the mean score on four Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales, covering pain, symptoms, function in sports and recreation and quality of life (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4)) supported by the individual subscale scores allowing clinical interpretation. Alongside, the RCT an observational cohort will follow patients aged 18–40 years with clinical suspicion of a meniscal tear, but not fully eligible or declining to participate in the trial.Ethics and disseminationResults will be presented in peer-reviewed journals and at international conferences. This study is approved by the Regional Committees on Health Research Ethics for Southern Denmark.Registration detailsClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02995551).


2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (53) ◽  
pp. 1-52
Author(s):  
David J Beard ◽  
Marion K Campbell ◽  
Jane M Blazeby ◽  
Andrew J Carr ◽  
Charles Weijer ◽  
...  

Background The use of placebo comparisons for randomised trials assessing the efficacy of surgical interventions is increasingly being considered. However, a placebo control is a complex type of comparison group in the surgical setting and, although powerful, presents many challenges. Objectives To provide a summary of knowledge on placebo controls in surgical trials and to summarise any recommendations for designers, evaluators and funders of placebo-controlled surgical trials. Design To carry out a state-of-the-art workshop and produce a corresponding report involving key stakeholders throughout. Setting A workshop to discuss and summarise the existing knowledge and to develop the new guidelines. Results To assess what a placebo control entails and to assess the understanding of this tool in the context of surgery is considered, along with when placebo controls in surgery are acceptable (and when they are desirable). We have considered ethics arguments and regulatory requirements, how a placebo control should be designed, how to identify and mitigate risk for participants in these trials, and how such trials should be carried out and interpreted. The use of placebo controls is justified in randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions provided that there is a strong scientific and ethics rationale. Surgical placebos might be most appropriate when there is poor evidence for the efficacy of the procedure and a justified concern that results of a trial would be associated with a high risk of bias, particularly because of the placebo effect. Conclusions The use of placebo controls is justified in randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions provided that there is a strong scientific and ethics rationale. Feasibility work is recommended to optimise the design and implementation of randomised controlled trials. An outline for best practice was produced in the form of the Applying Surgical Placebo in Randomised Evaluations (ASPIRE) guidelines for those considering the use of a placebo control in a surgical randomised controlled trial. Limitations Although the workshop participants involved international members, the majority of participants were from the UK. Therefore, although every attempt was made to make the recommendations applicable to all health systems, the guidelines may, unconsciously, be particularly applicable to clinical practice in the UK NHS. Future work Future work should evaluate the use of the ASPIRE guidelines in making decisions about the use of a placebo-controlled surgical trial. In addition, further work is required on the appropriate nomenclature to adopt in this space. Funding Funded by the Medical Research Council UK and the National Institute for Health Research as part of the Medical Research Council–National Institute for Health Research Methodology Research programme.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e019142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Jolly ◽  
Jenny Ingram ◽  
Joanne Clarke ◽  
Debbie Johnson ◽  
Heather Trickey ◽  
...  

IntroductionBreast feeding improves the health of mothers and infants; the UK has low rates, with marked socioeconomic inequalities. While trials of peer support services have been effective in some settings, UK trials have not improved breast feeding rates. Qualitative research suggests that many women are alienated by the focus on breast feeding. We propose a change from breast feeding-focused interactions to respecting a woman’s feeding choices, inclusion of behaviour change theory and an increased intensity of contacts in the 2 weeks after birth when many women cease to breast feed. This will take place alongside an assets-based approach that focuses on the positive capability of individuals, their social networks and communities.We propose a feasibility study for a multicentre randomised controlled trial of the Assets feeding help Before and After birth (ABA) infant feeding service versus usual care.Methods and analysisA two-arm, non-blinded randomised feasibility study will be conducted in two UK localities. Women expecting their first baby will be eligible, regardless of feeding intention. The ABA infant feeding intervention will apply a proactive, assets-based, woman-centred, non-judgemental approach, delivered antenatally and postnatally tailored through face-to-face contacts, telephone and SMS texts. Outcomes will test the feasibility of delivering the intervention with recommended intensity and duration to disadvantaged women; acceptability to women, feeding helpers and professionals; and feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial (RCT), detailing recruitment rates, willingness to be randomised, follow-up rates at 3 days, 8 weeks and 6 months, and level of outcome completion. Outcomes of the proposed full trial will also be collected. Mixed methods will include qualitative interviews with women/partners, feeding helpers and health service staff; feeding helper logs; and review of audio-recorded helper–women interactions to assess intervention fidelity.Ethics and disseminationStudy results will inform the design of a larger multicentre RCT. The National Research Ethics Service Committee approved the study protocol.Trial registration numberISRCTN14760978; Pre-results.


2021 ◽  
pp. bmjebm-2021-111714
Author(s):  
Heppy Khanpara ◽  
V Prakash

ObjectiveTo assess the effect of spin in the abstract of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) on physiotherapists’ perception of treatment benefit evaluated in the trial.DesignParallel-group RCT.SettingPhysiotherapy departments in hospitals and clinics in India.ParticipantsPhysiotherapists working in clinical settings.InterventionsWe selected one abstract with high level of spin published in one of the core journals of physiotherapy and created two versions of the abstract, that is, with and without spin. We randomly assigned physiotherapists working in clinical settings (N=128) to read one version of the selected abstract, with or without spin. Participants were blinded to the study design, objectives and randomisation.Main outcome measuresPhysiotherapists’ interpretation of beneficial effect of the experimental treatment (0–10 scale) reported in the abstract. The secondary outcomes were clinicians’ perception of methodological rigour and the study importance, their interest in reading the full text, and their interest in running another trial evaluating this treatment.ResultsWe found a medium reduction in confidence of beneficial effect of the experimental treatment among physiotherapists who read the abstract without spin (mean score 4.3±2.8) compared with those who read the abstract with spin (mean score 6.14±2.6). The mean difference in scores between abstracts with and without spin was 1.8 (95% CI 0.8 to 2.8; p<0.001). For other outcomes measures studied there was no statistically significant effect.ConclusionsRemoval of spin in the abstract of RCT reporting statistically non-significant results have medium effect in improving physiotherapists’ accuracy of interpretation of study results. Spin contributes to clinicians’ positive perception about the benefit of experimental intervention tested in the trial despite the evidence showing no superiority of experimental intervention.Trial registration numberCTRI/2020/02/023557.


BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. e032110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Baumgartner ◽  
Elena Bilevicius ◽  
Yasser Khazaal ◽  
Sophia Achab ◽  
Susanne Schaaf ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe past-year prevalence of problem gambling worldwide averages 2.3%. Switzerland exhibits a slightly lower past-year prevalence rate, of 1.1%, among adults. Only a minority of these adults attend outpatient treatment. Surveyed problem gamblers have explained that they wanted to handle the problem on their own. The option of a web-based self-help programme could potentially reach those users who hesitate to approach treatment centres and help them to reduce or stop their problem gambling. The effectiveness of such web-based interventions has been shown in other countries.Methods and analysisThis two-armed randomised controlled trial (RCT) will examine the efficacy of a web-based self-help intervention, relative to an active control condition with a self-help manual, at reducing problem gambling. The active intervention programme, spanning 8 weeks, consists of nine modules developed to reduce gambling and attenuate psychopathological comorbidity, including depression, anxiety and stress-related disorder symptoms, relying on motivational interviewing and cognitive behavioural therapy. With a target sample size of 352, questionnaire data will be collected at baseline, and at 8 and 24 weeks after baseline. Primary outcomes will be the number of days one has gambled in the last 30 days. Secondary outcomes will include money and time spent on gambling activities, changes in gambling-related problems (Problem Gambling Severity Index, Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale), use of alcohol and cigarettes, and psychopathological comorbidity. All data analysis will comply with the intention-to-treat principle.Ethics and disseminationThe RCT will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki; the consort eHealth Guidelines for studies on medical devices; the European Directive on medical devices 93/42/EEC, Swiss Law and Swiss Regulatory Authority requirements. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Canton of Zurich. Results will be published in a scientific peer-reviewed journal. Participants will be informed via e-mail about study results via a lay-person-friendly summary of trial findings.Trial registration numberCurrent Controlled Trials registry (ISRCTN16339434).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document