Pollock A V
Scarborough Hospital, North Yorkshire, UK.
Br J Surg. 1993 Aug;80(8):964-6. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800800807.
Surgeons have lagged behind physicians and oncologists in embracing randomized controlled clinical trials. This paper suggests that a complete, accurate and objective comparison of the outcome of a novel intervention with that of a traditional intervention in previous years, or in another surgical group, can yield valuable information and can lead surgeons to improve their practice. There has recently been a decline in the number of randomized controlled trials published in The British Journal of Surgery; this may reflect the unwillingness of many patients to allow their surgical treatment to be decided by chance.
外科医生在接受随机对照临床试验方面落后于内科医生和肿瘤学家。本文表明，将一种新型干预措施的结果与前几年或另一个外科小组的传统干预措施的结果进行全面、准确和客观的比较，可以产生有价值的信息，并能促使外科医生改进他们的做法。最近，《英国外科杂志》上发表的随机对照试验数量有所下降；这可能反映出许多患者不愿意让他们的手术治疗由随机决定。
