Department of Otolaryngology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center.
Otol Neurotol. 2023 Jul 1;44(6):534-541. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000003899. Epub 2023 May 31.
To review otology-related studies using the US Food and Drug Administration's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database to identify the opportunities and limitations of using MAUDE.
PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and EMBASE.
All studies reporting otology-related adverse events extracted from MAUDE were included from June 20, 2002, to 2022. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts, selected articles for exclusion, extracted data, and appraised studies. Critical appraisal was done according to the National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool for case series.
The search yielded 5,645 studies, of which 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. All eight studies were case series; three evaluated cochlear implants, two evaluated osseointegrated hearing implants, and one evaluated illuminated operating microscope use. Quality assessment revealed all studies to be of poor quality. The most common domains contributing to these ratings included unclear study population, lack of consecutive participants, comparability of participants, clear and consistent outcome measures, and appropriate statistical analysis.
Otology studies using the MAUDE database are of poor quality. This was primarily due to MAUDE's structural limitations as a passive surveillance system using nonstandardized free-text reports. The quality of studies also suffered from inappropriate analysis of MAUDE data, given its design. The utility of MAUDE could be improved by implementing case report best practices and converting the free fields to allow controlled and adaptive responses wherever possible to help standardize adverse event reporting.
通过审查美国食品和药物管理局的制造商和用户设施设备经验(MAUDE)数据库中的耳科学相关研究,确定使用 MAUDE 的机会和局限性。
PubMed、Science Direct、Web of Science、SCOPUS 和 EMBASE。
纳入 2002 年 6 月 20 日至 2022 年从 MAUDE 中提取的所有报告耳科学相关不良事件的研究。两名审查员独立筛选摘要、排除文章、提取数据和评估研究。根据国家卫生研究院病例系列质量评估工具进行关键评估。
检索到 5645 项研究,其中 8 项研究符合纳入标准。这 8 项研究均为病例系列研究;其中 3 项评估了耳蜗植入物,2 项评估了骨整合听力植入物,1 项评估了发光手术显微镜的使用。质量评估显示所有研究质量均较差。导致这些评级的最常见领域包括研究人群不明确、缺乏连续参与者、参与者的可比性、明确和一致的结果测量以及适当的统计分析。
使用 MAUDE 数据库的耳科学研究质量较差。这主要是由于 MAUDE 作为一个使用非标准化自由文本报告的被动监测系统存在结构限制。由于其设计,对 MAUDE 数据进行不当分析也降低了研究质量。通过实施病例报告最佳实践并转换自由字段,尽可能允许控制和自适应响应,有助于标准化不良事件报告,从而提高 MAUDE 的实用性。