Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26710760›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

Novel ways to explore surgical interventions in randomised controlled trials: applying case study methodology in the operating theatre.

Natalie S Blencowe, Jane M Blazeby, Jenny L Donovan, Nicola Mills

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Natalie S BlencoweCentre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. natalie.blencowe@bristol.ac.uk.
Jane M BlazebyCentre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. j.m.blazeby@bristol.ac.uk.
Jenny L DonovanCentre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. jenny.donovan@bristol.ac.uk.
Nicola MillsCentre for Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. nicola.mills@bristol.ac.uk.

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2011-04-016Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMulti-centre randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in surgery are challenging. It is particularly difficult to establish standards of surgery and ensure that interventions are delivered as intended. This study developed and tested methods for identifying the key components of surgical interventions and standardising interventions within RCTs. Qualitative case studies of surgical interventions were undertaken within the internal pilot phase of a surgical RCT for obesity (the By-Band study). Each case study involved video data capture and non-participant observation of gastric bypass surgery in the operating theatre and interviews with surgeons. Methods were developed to transcribe and synchronise data from video recordings with observational data to identify key intervention components, which were then explored in the interviews with surgeons.

resultsEight qualitative case studies were undertaken. A novel combination of video data capture, observation and interview data identified variations in intervention delivery between surgeons and centres. Although surgeons agreed that the most critical intervention component was the size and shape of the gastric pouch, there was no consensus regarding other aspects of the procedure. They conceded that evidence about the 'best way' to perform bypass was lacking and, combined with the pragmatic nature of the By-Band study, agreed that strict standardisation of bypass might not be required.

conclusionsThis study has developed and tested methods for understanding how surgical interventions are designed and delivered delivered in RCTs. Applying these methods more widely may help identify key components of interventions to be delivered by surgeons in trials, enabling monitoring of key components and adherence to the protocol. These methods are now being tested in the context of other surgical RCTs.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN00786323 , 05/09/2011.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceClinical ProtocolsEvidence-Based MedicineGastric BypassGuideline AdherenceHumansInterviews as TopicObesityOperating RoomsPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'Qualitative ResearchResearch DesignTask Performance and AnalysisTreatment OutcomeVideo Recording

Identifiers

PMID26710760
PMCPMC4693411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.