Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials

By Jonathan Alistair Cook

Abstract

Randomised evaluations of surgical interventions are rare; some interventions have been widely\ud adopted without rigorous evaluation. Unlike other medical areas, the randomised controlled trial\ud (RCT) design has not become the default study design for the evaluation of surgical interventions.\ud Surgical trials are difficult to successfully undertake and pose particular practical and methodological challenges. However, RCTs have played a role in the assessment of surgical innovations and there is scope and need for greater use. This article will consider the design, conduct and analysis of an RCT of a surgical intervention. The issues will be reviewed under three\ud headings: the timing of the evaluation, defining the research question and trial design issues.\ud Recommendations on the conduct of future surgical RCTs are made. Collaboration between\ud research and surgical communities is needed to address the distinct issues raised by the assessmentof surgical interventions and enable the conduct of appropriate and well-designed trials.The Health Services Research Unit is funded by the Scottish Government Health DirectoratesPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Topics: Randomised Controlled Trials as Topic, Research Design, Surgical Procedures, Operative, RD Surgery
Publisher: BMC
Year: 2009
DOI identifier: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-9
OAI identifier: oai:aura.abdn.ac.uk:2164/288
Journal:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2003). (page number not for citation purposes) duct of appropriate and well-designed trials. Three ticrew M, Altman D: Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess
  2. (1996). AG: Randomised, prospective, single-blind comparison of laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy. Lancet doi
  3. (2003). Altman D: Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess
  4. (2002). Altman DG: The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomized trials. Ann Intern Med doi
  5. (2003). Büchler MW: Perspectives of evidence-based surgery. Dig Surg doi
  6. Council UK: Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. [http://www.mrc.ac.uk/com plexinterventionsguidance].
  7. (2002). D: Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ doi
  8. (1995). De: Randomized comparison of morbidity after D1 and D2 dissection for gastric cancer in 996 Dutch patients. Lancet doi
  9. (2005). Design and analysis of clinical trials with clustering effects due to treatment. Clin Trials doi
  10. (2006). Deyo RA: Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial. JAMA doi
  11. (2008). DISPACT Trial Group: DISPACT trial: a randomized controlled trial to compare two different surgical techniques of DIStal PAnCreaTectomy – study rationale and design. Clin Trials doi
  12. (1995). DL: Inpatient general medicine is evidence based. Lancet doi
  13. (2004). Ethics and evidence based surgery. doi
  14. (1995). Evaluating new surgical interventions. BMJ doi
  15. (1997). Evidencebased surgery: interventions in a regional paediatric surgical unit. Arch Dis Child
  16. (1999). Factors that limit the quality, number and progress of randomized controlled trials. Health Technol Assess doi
  17. (2004). Fayers P: Statistical evaluation of learning curve effects in surgical trials. Clin Trials doi
  18. (2007). Fayers P: Using the literature to quantify the learning curve. nt J Technol Assess Health Care doi
  19. (2002). Fink A: Reporting randomised, controlled trials: where quality of reporting may be improved. Dis Colon Rectum doi
  20. (2008). for the CONSORT Group: Methods and Processes of the CONSORT Group: Example of an extension for Trials assessing nonpharmacologic treatments. Ann Intern Med doi
  21. (2006). for the HIPAID Collaborative Group: Safety and efficacy of routine postoperative ibuprofen for pain and disability related to ectopic bone formation after hip replacement surgery (HIPAID): randomised controlled trial. BMJ doi
  22. (2004). for the Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program: Open mesh versus laparoscopic mesh repair of inguinal hernia. doi
  23. General Surgery. In Textbook of clinical trials 2nd edition. Edited by:
  24. (2005). Guyatt GH: Need for expertise based randomised controlled trials. BMJ
  25. (2002). Hamdy F: Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. BMJ doi
  26. (2004). Hulley SB, ual functioning: the medicine or surgery (Ms) randomized trial. JAMA doi
  27. (2008). Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ doi
  28. (2002). Innovation in surgery. doi
  29. (1985). Is surgery worthwhile? Arch Surg doi
  30. (1999). Issues in surgical randomized controlled trials. doi
  31. (2001). IT: Statistical assessment of the learning curves of health technologies. Health Technol Assess
  32. (2005). JF: Displaced intracapsular hip fractures in fit, older people: a randomised comparison of reduction and fixation, bipolar hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty. Health technol Assess
  33. (1996). JL: Methodologic standards in surgical trials. Surgery doi
  34. (2002). Kadane JB: Placebos that harm: sham surgery controls in clinical trials. Stat Methods Med Res doi
  35. (2007). Lyratzopoulos G: Association of study type, sample size, and followup length with type of recommendation produced by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Interventional Interventions Programme. Int J Technol Assess Health Care doi
  36. (2008). MB: National institutes of health funding for surgical research. Ann Surg doi
  37. (1993). McLeod RS: Clinical Studies in surgical journals – have we improved? Dis Colon Rectum doi
  38. (1995). McLeod RS: Should we be performing more randomized controlled trials evaluating surgical operations? Surgery doi
  39. (1948). Medical Research Council: Streptomycin treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. doi
  40. (2004). Ms Research Group: Effect of hysterectomy vs medical treatment on health-related quality of life and sexual functioning: the medicine or surgery (Ms) randomized trial. JAMA doi
  41. (2002). NP: A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. doi
  42. (1980). Pitfalls in randomized surgical trials. Surgery
  43. (2002). Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ doi
  44. (2003). Prospective randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open inguinal hernia mesh repair: Five year follow up. BMJ doi
  45. (1975). Randomization of the first patient. Med Clin North Am
  46. Randomized clinical trials in surgery. doi
  47. (1979). Randomized clinical trials in the evaluation of surgical innovation. doi
  48. (2007). Ravaud P: Reporting methods of blinding in randomized controlled trials assessing non pharmacological treatments. PLos Med doi
  49. (2008). Recruitment to publicity funded trials – Are surgical trials really different? Contemp Clin Trials doi
  50. (2007). Scardino PT: The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy. doi
  51. (2000). SJ: Trials and fast changing technologies: the case for tracker studies. BMJ doi
  52. (2006). Snowdon C: What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials
  53. (1991). Some problems with clinical trials. Arch Surg doi
  54. (1998). Spiegelhalter D: Randomised controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open mesh repair for inguinal hernia: outcome and cost. BMJ doi
  55. (2005). Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation. Lancet doi
  56. (1993). Surgical evaluation at the crossroads. doi
  57. (1997). Surgical practice is evidence based. doi
  58. (2004). T: Trials in surgery. doi
  59. (1992). The challenge of evaluating surgical interventions. Ann R Coll Surg Engl
  60. (1983). The practical and ethical defects of surgical randomised prospective trials. doi
  61. (2007). The quality of reporting of orthopaedic randomized trials with use of a checklist for nonpharmacological therapies. J Bone Joint Surg Am doi
  62. (2007). The reporting quality of randomised controlled trials in surgery: A systematic review. doi
  63. (1989). The rise and fall of the randomised controlled trial in surgery. Theor Surg
  64. (2005). Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ doi
  65. (2002). Tronetta P: Application of the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) in the fracture care literature.
  66. (2005). Uses and limitations of randomization-based efficacy estimators. Stat Methods Med Res doi
  67. (2008). Waiting times for scoliosis surgery. Lancet doi
  68. (1998). What is Zelen's design? BMJ doi
  69. (1997). When and how to assess fast-changing technologies: a comparative study of medical applications of four generic technologies. Health Technol Assess

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.