National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 29;12(4):e056003. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056003.
Outcome selection and reporting in studies of novel surgical procedures and devices lacks standardisation, hindering safe and effective evaluation. A core outcome set (COS) to measure and report in all studies of surgical innovation is needed. We explored outcomes in a specific sample of innovative surgical device case studies to identify outcome domains specifically relevant to innovation to inform the development of a COS.
A targeted review of 11 purposive selected case studies of innovative surgical devices.
Electronic database searches in PubMed (July 2018) identified publications reporting the introduction and evaluation of each device. Outcomes were extracted and categorised into domains until no new domains were conceptualised. Outcomes specifically relevant to evaluating innovation were further scrutinised.
112 relevant publications were identified, and 5926 outcomes extracted. Heterogeneity in study type, outcome selection and reporting was observed across surgical devices. Categorisation of outcomes was performed for 2689 (45.4%) outcomes into five broad outcome domains. Outcomes considered key to the evaluation of innovation (n=66; 2.5%) were further categorised as surgeon/operator experience (n=40; 1.5%), unanticipated events (n=15, 0.6%) and modifications (n=11; 0.4%).
Outcome domains unique to evaluating innovative surgical devices have been identified. Findings have been combined with multiple other data sources relevant to the evaluation of surgical innovation to inform the development of a COS to measure and report in all studies evaluating novel surgical procedures/devices.
新型手术程序和器械研究中的结果选择和报告缺乏标准化,这阻碍了对其安全性和有效性的评估。需要制定一个核心结局集(COS)来衡量和报告所有创新性外科研究。我们对一组特定的创新手术器械案例研究中的结果进行了探索,以确定与创新相关的具体结果领域,为制定 COS 提供信息。
对 11 项有目的选择的创新性外科器械案例研究进行了针对性审查。
在 PubMed 中进行电子数据库检索(2018 年 7 月),以确定报告每个器械引入和评估的出版物。提取结果并将其归类为不同的领域,直到没有新的领域被概念化。进一步审查了专门用于评估创新的结果。
确定了 112 篇相关出版物,并提取了 5926 项结果。观察到不同手术器械之间研究类型、结果选择和报告的异质性。将 2689 项(45.4%)结果分为五个广泛的结果领域。将被认为对评估创新至关重要的结果(n=66;2.5%)进一步分为外科医生/操作人员经验(n=40;1.5%)、意外事件(n=15,0.6%)和修改(n=11;0.4%)。
已经确定了评估创新性外科器械特有的结果领域。研究结果与其他多个与外科创新评估相关的数据来源相结合,为制定一个 COS 提供了信息,以衡量和报告所有评估新型外科手术程序/器械的研究。