Wall Peter D H, Richards Bethan L, Sprowson Andrew, Buchbinder Rachelle, Singh Jasvinder A
Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Institute of Rheumatology and Orthopaedics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Syst Rev. 2017 May 30;6(1):106. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0498-3.
It is not known, whether outcome reporting in trials of total joint arthroplasty in the recent years is adequate or not. Our objective was to assess whether outcomes reported in total joint replacement (TJR) trials fulfil the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0.
We systematically reviewed all TJR trials in adults, published in English in 2008 or 2013. Searches were conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria for the studies, and any disagreement was resolved with a third review author. All outcome measures were abstracted using a pre-piloted standardised data extraction form and assessed for whether they mapped to one of the three OMERACT Filter 2.0 core areas: pathophysiological, life impact, and death.
From 1635 trials identified, we included 70 trials (30 in 2008 and 40 in 2013) meeting the eligibility criteria. Twenty-two (31%) trials reported the three essential OMERACT core areas. Among the 27 hip replacement surgery trials and 39 knee replacement surgery trials included, 11 hip (41%) and nine knee (23%) trials reported all three essential OMERACT core areas. The most common outcome domains/measures were pain (20/27, 74%) and function (23/27, 85%) in hip trials and pain (26/39, 67%) and function (27/39, 69%) in knee trials. Results were similar for shoulder and hand joint replacement trials.
We identified significant gaps in the measurement of OMERACT core outcome areas in TJR trials, despite the majority reporting outcome domains of pain and function. An international consensus of key stakeholders is needed to develop a core domain set for reporting of TJR trials.
PROSPERO CRD42014009216.
近年来全关节置换术试验的结果报告是否充分尚不清楚。我们的目的是评估全关节置换(TJR)试验中报告的结果是否符合风湿病学疗效指标(OMERACT)筛选标准2.0。
我们系统回顾了2008年或2013年以英文发表的所有成人TJR试验。检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库、MEDLINE和EMBASE。两名作者独立应用研究的纳入标准,如有分歧则由第三位审稿作者解决。所有疗效指标均使用预先试点的标准化数据提取表进行摘要,并评估它们是否映射到OMERACT筛选标准2.0的三个核心领域之一:病理生理学、生活影响和死亡。
从1635项试验中,我们纳入了70项符合入选标准的试验(2008年30项,2013年40项)。22项(31%)试验报告了OMERACT的三个基本核心领域。在纳入的27项髋关节置换手术试验和39项膝关节置换手术试验中,11项髋关节试验(41%)和9项膝关节试验(23%)报告了所有三个基本OMERACT核心领域。髋关节试验中最常见的疗效领域/指标是疼痛(20/27,74%)和功能(23/27,85%),膝关节试验中是疼痛(26/39,67%)和功能(27/39,69%)。肩关节和手部关节置换试验的结果相似。
我们发现TJR试验中OMERACT核心疗效领域的测量存在显著差距,尽管大多数试验报告了疼痛和功能的疗效领域。需要关键利益相关者达成国际共识,以制定TJR试验报告的核心领域集。
PROSPERO CRD42014009216。