PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12049555

Randomized controlled trials for evaluating surgical questions.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To discuss some of the obstacles inherent in the design of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) that the surgeon must confront and options to minimize these obstacles. DATA SOURCES: The literature was searched for articles discussing RCTs using MEDLINE from 1966 to 1998. STUDY SELECTION: Studies relevant to the general use of RCTs for evaluating surgical questions were selected. SYNTHESIS: Several problems inherent in RCTs were noted: (1) ethical considerations, (2) difficulties in patient accrual, (3) patient preferences, and (4) variability in surgical proficiency/technique. Some means of minimizing these problems are (1) the concept of clinical equipoise, (2) multicenter trials, and (3) stratified sampling of patients. Alternatives to the classic RCT are discussed, namely, the randomized consent design and the patient preference design. CONCLUSIONS: The nature of the RCTs is that they are difficult to use to evaluate surgical techniques. Some options are available to minimize these difficulties. Designing and conducting RCTs to evaluate surgical interventions require careful planning and some compromises. Unless the previously mentioned criteria are applied, the validity of the RCT can be considered no greater than that of other trials.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Eric K Fung, John M Loré. 2002. Randomized controlled trials for evaluating surgical questions.. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.128.6.631

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[A separation of public health ethics from medical ethics].

Until now there are only a few approaches in the German-speaking realm to establish an explicit ethical framework for moral issues of public health--although a need for public health ethics in times of SARS and avian flu is obvious. One deficit of the discussion so far is that there is no systematic separation of medical ethics and public health ethics. Thus, the core and interdisciplinary focus of public health is often not met. However, to frame discussions of moral issues within a specific public health ethics framework seems to be fruitful. This paper deals with the conceptual differences of medical ethics and public health ethics. The discussion helps both applied ethical discourses to sharpen their focus and strengthen their appeal. The author develops and presents a conceptual and normative frame for public health ethics and offers a concise set of ethical principles for the discussion of moral challenges in public health.

Ethics, Medical↗