Statistical Analysis Plan for the Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group programme for men who are concerned about their abusive behaviour with women: A Randomised Controlled Trial

[No Abstract

Rehabilitation versus surgical reconstruction for non-acute anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL SNNAP): a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

BackgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common debilitating injury that can cause instability of the knee. We aimed to investigate the best management strategy between reconstructive surgery and non-surgical treatment for patients with a non-acute ACL injury and persistent symptoms of instability.MethodsWe did a pragmatic, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial in 29 secondary care National Health Service orthopaedic units in the UK. Patients with symptomatic knee problems (instability) consistent with an ACL injury were eligible. We excluded patients with meniscal pathology with characteristics that indicate immediate surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by computer to either surgery (reconstruction) or rehabilitation (physiotherapy but with subsequent reconstruction permitted if instability persisted after treatment), stratified by site and baseline Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score—4 domain version (KOOS4). This management design represented normal practice. The primary outcome was KOOS4 at 18 months after randomisation. The principal analyses were intention-to-treat based, with KOOS4 results analysed using linear regression. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN10110685, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02980367.FindingsBetween Feb 1, 2017, and April 12, 2020, we recruited 316 patients. 156 (49%) participants were randomly assigned to the surgical reconstruction group and 160 (51%) to the rehabilitation group. Mean KOOS4 at 18 months was 73·0 (SD 18·3) in the surgical group and 64·6 (21·6) in the rehabilitation group. The adjusted mean difference was 7·9 (95% CI 2·5–13·2; p=0·0053) in favour of surgical management. 65 (41%) of 160 patients allocated to rehabilitation underwent subsequent surgery according to protocol within 18 months. 43 (28%) of 156 patients allocated to surgery did not receive their allocated treatment. We found no differences between groups in the proportion of intervention-related complications.InterpretationSurgical reconstruction as a management strategy for patients with non-acute ACL injury with persistent symptoms of instability was clinically superior and more cost-effective in comparison with rehabilitation management

Clinical outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy in octogenarians:a surgeon's experience from 2007 to 2015

BACKGROUND: As the number of elderly people in our population increases, there will be a greater number of octogenarians who will need pancreaticoduodenectomy as the only curative option for periampullary malignancies. This study evaluated clinical outcomes of pancreaticoduodenectomy in octogenarians, in comparison to younger patients. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 216 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy from January 2007 to April 2015. A two-sided Fisher’s exact statistical analysis was used to compare pre-operative comorbidities, intra-operative factors, surgical pathology, and post-operative complication rates between non-octogenarians and octogenarians. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty three non-octogenarians and 33 octogenarians underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Of patients with periampullary adenocarcinoma, octogenarians were more likely to present with advanced disease state (P=0.01). The two cohorts had similar ASA scores (P=0.62); however, octogenarians were more likely to have coronary artery disease (P=0.03). The length of operation was shorter in octogenarians (P=0.002). Mortality rates (P=0.49) and overall postoperative complication rates (P=1.0) were similar in two cohorts; however octogenarians had a higher incidence of pulmonary embolism (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrates that octogenarians can undergo pancreaticoduodenectomy with outcomes similar to those in younger patients. Thus, patients should not be denied a curative surgical option for periampullary malignancy based on advanced age alone

Surgeon-Specific Reports in General Surgery: Establishing Benchmarks for Peer Comparison Within a Single Hospital

© 2016 American College of Surgeons. Background Methods to assess a surgeon\u27s individual performance based on clinically meaningful outcomes have not been fully developed, due to small numbers of adverse outcomes and wide variation in case volumes. The Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC) method addresses these issues by identifying benchmark-setting surgeons with high levels of performance and greater case volumes. This method was used to help surgeons compare their surgical practice to that of their peers by using merged National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data to generate surgeon-specific reports. Study design A retrospective cohort study at a single institution\u27s department of surgery was conducted involving 107 surgeons (8,660 cases) over 5.5 years. Stratification of more than 32,000 CPT codes into 16 CPT clusters served as the risk adjustment. Thirty-day outcomes of interest included surgical site infection (SSI), acute kidney injury (AKI), and mortality. Performance characteristics of the ABC method were explored by examining how many surgeons were identified as benchmark-setters in view of volume and outcome rates within CPT clusters. Results For the data captured, most surgeons performed cases spanning a median of 5 CPT clusters (range 1 to 15 clusters), with a median of 26 cases (range 1 to 776 cases) and a median of 2.8 years (range 0 to 5.5 years). The highest volume surgeon for that CPT cluster set the benchmark for 6 of 16 CPT clusters for SSIs, 8 of 16 CPT clusters for AKIs, and 9 of 16 CPT clusters for mortality. Conclusions The ABC method appears to be a sound and useful approach to identifying benchmark-setting surgeons within a single institution. Such surgeons may be able to help their peers improve their performance

Effect of delirium motoric subtypes on administrative documentation of delirium in the surgical intensive care unit

This study compares the proportions of surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients with delirium detected using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) who received administrative documentation for delirium using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes, stratified by delirium motoric subtypes. This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a surgical ICU from 06/2012 to 05/2013. Delirium was assessed twice daily and was defined as having ≥1 positive CAM-ICU rating. Delirious patients were categorized into hyperactive/mixed and hypoactive subtypes using corresponding Richmond Agitation Sedation Scales. Administrative documentation of delirium was defined as having ≥1 of 32 unique ICD-9-CM codes. Proportions were compared using Pearson’s Chi-square test. Of included patients, 40 % (423/1055) were diagnosed with delirium, and 17 % (183/1055) had an ICD-9-CM code for delirium. The sensitivity and specificity of ICD-9-CM codes for delirium were 36 and 95 %. ICD-9-CM codes for delirium were available for 42 % (95 % CI 35–48 %; 105/253) of patients with hyperactive/mixed delirium and 27 % (95 % CI 20–34 %; 46/170) of patients with hypoactive delirium (relative risk = 1.5; 95 % CI 1.2–2.0; p = 0.002). ICD-9-CM codes yielded a low sensitivity for identifying patients with CAM-ICU positive delirium and were more likely to identify hyperactive/mixed delirium compared with hypoactive delirium

Surgeon-Specific Reports in General Surgery:Establishing Benchmarks for Peer Comparison Within a Single Hospital

© 2016 American College of Surgeons. Background Methods to assess a surgeon\u27s individual performance based on clinically meaningful outcomes have not been fully developed, due to small numbers of adverse outcomes and wide variation in case volumes. The Achievable Benchmark of Care (ABC) method addresses these issues by identifying benchmark-setting surgeons with high levels of performance and greater case volumes. This method was used to help surgeons compare their surgical practice to that of their peers by using merged National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data to generate surgeon-specific reports. Study design A retrospective cohort study at a single institution\u27s department of surgery was conducted involving 107 surgeons (8,660 cases) over 5.5 years. Stratification of more than 32,000 CPT codes into 16 CPT clusters served as the risk adjustment. Thirty-day outcomes of interest included surgical site infection (SSI), acute kidney injury (AKI), and mortality. Performance characteristics of the ABC method were explored by examining how many surgeons were identified as benchmark-setters in view of volume and outcome rates within CPT clusters. Results For the data captured, most surgeons performed cases spanning a median of 5 CPT clusters (range 1 to 15 clusters), with a median of 26 cases (range 1 to 776 cases) and a median of 2.8 years (range 0 to 5.5 years). The highest volume surgeon for that CPT cluster set the benchmark for 6 of 16 CPT clusters for SSIs, 8 of 16 CPT clusters for AKIs, and 9 of 16 CPT clusters for mortality. Conclusions The ABC method appears to be a sound and useful approach to identifying benchmark-setting surgeons within a single institution. Such surgeons may be able to help their peers improve their performance

ACL Surgery Necessity in Non-Acute Patients (ACL SNNAP): a statistical analysis plan for a randomised controlled trial

Background Rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is a common injury, primarily affecting young, active individuals. Despite surgical intervention being the more common treatment for patients suffering ACL ruptures, current management is based on limited and generally low-quality evidence. We describe a statistical analysis plan (SAP) for the ACL SNNAP randomised controlled trial, which aims to investigate the necessity of surgical management in patients with ACL injuries. Methods/design ACL SNNAP is a pragmatic, multi-centre, superiority, parallel-group randomised controlled trial in participants with a symptomatic non-acute ACL deficient knee. Participants are allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either non-surgical management (rehabilitation) or surgical management (reconstruction) with the aim of assessing the efficacy and cost-effectiveness. The primary outcome of the study is the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4) at 18 months post-randomisation. The KOOS4 score at 18 months will be evaluated using a linear regression model adjusting for recruitment centre and baseline KOOS4 scores, allowing for intra-centre correlation. A secondary analysis of the primary outcome will be carried out using an area under the curve (AUC) approach using treatment estimates obtained from a mixed model using baseline, 6 months, 12 months, and 18 months post-randomisation outcome data. Secondary outcomes will be measured at 18 months and will include return to activity/level of sport participation, intervention-related complications, the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire, all 5 individual subscales of the KOOS questionnaire, the ACL-QOL score, expectations of return to activity and cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Missing primary outcome data will be investigated through a sensitivity analysis. Full details of the planned methods for the statistical analysis of clinical outcomes are presented in this paper. The study protocol for the ACL SNNAP trial has been published previously. Discussion The methods of analysis for the ACL SNNAP trial have been described here to minimise the risk of data-driven results and reporting bias. Any deviations from the analysis methods described in this paper will be described in full and justified in the publications of the trial results. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN10110685. Registered on 16 November 201

Should the nail plate be replaced or discarded after nail bed repair in children? Nail bed INJury Analysis (NINJA) randomised controlled trial: a health economic and statistical analysis plan

BACKGROUND:Nail bed trauma is one of the most common surgically treated paediatric hand injuries in the UK. Despite surgeons generally expressing a preference to replace the nail plate after repairing the nail bed, there is limited evidence to support this practice. We describe a statistical and health economic analysis plan (SHEAP) for the Nail bed INJury Analysis (NINJA) randomised controlled trial. METHODS/DESIGN:NINJA is a multicentre, pragmatic, superiority, parallel group randomised controlled trial of the treatment of nail bed injury in participants 16 years old or younger. The study aims to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of replacing the nail plate compared to discarding it following the repair of a nail bed injury. Surgical site infection at 7-10 days post-randomisation and cosmetic appearance of the nail are the co-primary outcomes for NINJA. Surgical site infection at 7-10 days post-randomisation will be evaluated using a logistic regression model adjusting for site as the sole stratification factor and allowing for intra-site correlation. Cosmetic appearance will be assessed via the newly developed Oxford Finger Nail Appearance Score and will be evaluated by use of a Mann-Whitney U test. An ordinal logistic regression model will also be used to assess the Oxford Finger Nail Appearance Score, adjusting for site and allowing for intra-site correlation. Secondary outcomes are measured at 7-10 days and 4 months and include the EQ-5D-Y questionnaire, pain at first dressing change, cost-effectiveness, late surgical site infection, and participant/parent satisfaction with nail healing. Missing primary outcome data will be summarised by treatment arm and investigated through a sensitivity analysis. Full details of the planned methods of analysis and descriptive statistics are described in this paper. The NINJA study protocol has been published previously. DISCUSSION:The planned analysis strategy for the NINJA trial has been set out here to reduce the risk of reporting bias and data-driven analysis. Any deviations from the SHEAP described in this paper will be detailed and justified fully in the final report of the trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN, ISRCTN44551796 . Registered on 23 April 2018