The Characteristics and Ethics of Sham Surgeries

医学 临床试验 假手术 梅德林 随机对照试验 外科 普通外科 物理疗法 替代医学 内科学 病理 政治学 法学
作者
Peter T. Hetzler,Lauren E. Berger,Samuel S. Huffman,Margaret Lee,Ryan Park,David Song,Lydia S. Dugdale
出处
期刊:Annals of Surgery [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
被引量:6
标识
DOI:10.1097/sla.0000000000005882
摘要

We sought to perform a large-scale systematic review across all sham-controlled studies currently present in the literature to better characterize the ethical considerations of these studies.Innovative surgical procedures are often introduced into the clinical setting without the robust clinical trials required for medicinal treatments. Sham surgeries serve as placebos by performing all steps of a surgical intervention aside from those deemed therapeutically necessary. Yet, sham trials are underutilized because of ethical controversy.Ovid MEDLINE was queried through April 2022 with combinations of the Medical Subject (MeSH) headings and keywords including, but not limited to, "surgery," "endoscopy," "randomized controlled trial," and "sham procedure." Primary outcomes were surgical indications and characteristics, outcome measurements, and whether the investigational treatment was offered to the sham cohort.One hundred seventy-two articles fit our inclusion criteria, with gastrointestinal pathologies being the most common surgical indication. Participants, personnel, and outcome assessment were all blinded in 8.7% of trials (n=15). Study populations included adult subjects (age ≥18) in 170 studies (98.8%), and two involved children. The most common level of dissection and type of anesthesia were deep (n=66, 38.4%) and general (n=49, 28.5%), respectively. An open surgical approach was utilized in 20.9% of studies (n=36). Primary outcomes were objective in 75 studies (43.6%) and subjective in 97 (56.4%), 62 of which used validated outcome measures (36.0%). Four trials explicitly did not offer the surgery to the sham arm (2.3%), whereas 106 had no mention of whether the intervention was offered (61.6%).Our systematic review of 172 randomized, sham-controlled trials highlights the ethical considerations that must be considered in these studies, namely the importance of transparent study design and objective outcome reporting, the difficulty of informed consent, and the inherent risks associated with surgical interventions.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
1秒前
英姑应助charint采纳,获得10
1秒前
Akim应助Sunbird采纳,获得10
1秒前
小闹waaa发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
fuHM发布了新的文献求助20
1秒前
luxx驳回了传奇3应助
2秒前
2秒前
2秒前
哄哄完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
3秒前
冷傲的丹寒完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
桐桐应助饱满的荧采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
4秒前
wyc完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
乐可乐发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
田様应助22222222采纳,获得10
4秒前
skyline完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
5秒前
zeze完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
Hu完成签到 ,获得积分10
7秒前
7907完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
健壮青旋发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
小也发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
Owen应助一周八颗蛋采纳,获得10
7秒前
7秒前
malenia完成签到,获得积分10
8秒前
Auba发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
NI伦Ge发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
碧蓝绮山发布了新的文献求助10
8秒前
认真栾发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
Sky完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
灵感菇完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
9秒前
9秒前
shishui发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
10秒前
阿冲发布了新的文献求助10
10秒前
科目三应助青柠采纳,获得10
10秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Picture this! Including first nations fiction picture books in school library collections 2000
The Cambridge History of China: Volume 4, Sui and T'ang China, 589–906 AD, Part Two 1500
Cowries - A Guide to the Gastropod Family Cypraeidae 1200
ON THE THEORY OF BIRATIONAL BLOWING-UP 666
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
Pulse width control of a 3-phase inverter with non sinusoidal phase voltages 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6390227
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8205404
关于积分的说明 17365288
捐赠科研通 5443993
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2878393
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1854857
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1698151