Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37511657›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2023

Randomized Clinical Trials and Observational Tribulations: Providing Clinical Evidence for Personalized Surgical Pain Management Care Models.

Ivo Abraham, Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski, John C Elfar, Zong-Ming Li, Rossano Kepler Alvim Fiorelli, Mauricio G Pereira, Morgan P Lorio, Benedikt W Burkhardt, Joachim M Oertel, Peter A Winkler and 14 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

24 authors.

Ivo AbrahamPharmacy Medicine, and Clinical Translational Sciences, University of Arizona, Roy P. Drachman Hall, Rm. B306H, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5224-4977
Kai-Uwe LewandrowskiCenter for Advanced Spine Care of Southern Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85712, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7842-2914
John C ElfarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine-Tucson Campus, Health Sciences Innovation Building (HSIB), University of Arizona, 1501 N. Campbell Avenue, Tower 4, 8th Floor, Suite 8401, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA.
Zong-Ming LiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine-Tucson Campus, Health Sciences Innovation Building (HSIB), University of Arizona, 1501 N. Campbell Avenue, Tower 4, 8th Floor, Suite 8401, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA.
Rossano Kepler Alvim FiorelliDepartment of General and Specialized Surgery, Gaffrée e Guinle University Hospital, Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO), Rio de Janeiro 20270-004, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5236-0903
Mauricio G PereiraFaculty of Medicine, University of Brasilia, Federal District, Brasilia 70919-900, Brazil.
Morgan P LorioAdvanced Orthopaedics, 499 E. Central Pkwy, Ste. 130, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701, USA.
Benedikt W BurkhardtWirbelsäulenzentrum/Spine Center-WSC, Hirslanden Klinik Zurich, Witellikerstrasse 40, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland.
Joachim M OertelKlinik für Neurochirurgie, Universität des Saarlandes, Kirrberger Straße 100, 66421 Homburg, Germany.
Peter A WinklerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charite Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, 13353 Berlin, Germany.
Huilin YangOrthopaedic Department, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, No. 899 Pinghai Road, Suzhou 215031, China.
Jorge Felipe Ramírez LeónMinimally Invasive Spine Center Bogotá D.C. Colombia, Reina Sofía Clinic Bogotá D.C. Colombia, Department of Orthopaedics, Fundación Universitaria Sanitas, Bogotá 110141, Colombia.
Albert E TelfeianDepartment of Neurosurgery, Rhode Island Hospital, The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI 02903, USA.
Álvaro DowlingDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14071-550, Brazil.
Roth A A VargasDepartment of Neurosurgery, Foundation Hospital Centro Médico Campinas, Campinas 13083-210, Brazil.
Ricardo RaminaNeurological Institute of Curitiba, Curitiba 80230-030, Brazil.
Marjan AsefiDepartment of Biology, Nano-Biology, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, NC 27413, USA.
Paulo Sérgio Teixeira de CarvalhoPain and Spine Minimally Invasive Surgery Service, Gaffre e Guinle University Hospital, Rio de Janeiro 20270-004, Brazil.
Helton DefinoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto 14071-550, Brazil.
Jaime MoyanoLa Sociedad Iberolatinoamericana De Columna (SILACO), The Spine Committee of the Ecuadorian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology (Comité de Columna de la Sociedad Ecuatoriana de Ortopedia y Traumatología), Quito 170521, Ecuador.
Nicola MontemurroDepartment of Neurosurgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana, University of Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3686-8907
Anthony YeungDesert Institute for Spine Care, Phoenix, AZ 85020, USA.
Pietro NovellinoGuinle and State Institute of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Rio de Janeiro 20270-004, Brazil.
On Behalf Of Teams/Organizations/Institutions

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proving clinical superiority of personalized care models in interventional and surgical pain management is challenging. The apparent difficulties may arise from the inability to standardize complex surgical procedures that often involve multiple steps. Ensuring the surgery is performed the same way every time is nearly impossible. Confounding factors, such as the variability of the patient population and selection bias regarding comorbidities and anatomical variations are also difficult to control for. Small sample sizes in study groups comparing iterations of a surgical protocol may amplify bias. It is essentially impossible to conceal the surgical treatment from the surgeon and the operating team. Restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria may distort the study population to no longer reflect patients seen in daily practice. Hindsight bias is introduced by the inability to effectively blind patient group allocation, which affects clinical result interpretation, particularly if the outcome is already known to the investigators when the outcome analysis is performed (often a long time after the intervention). Randomization is equally problematic, as many patients want to avoid being randomly assigned to a study group, particularly if they perceive their surgeon to be unsure of which treatment will likely render the best clinical outcome for them. Ethical concerns may also exist if the study involves additional and unnecessary risks. Lastly, surgical trials are costly, especially if the tested interventions are complex and require long-term follow-up to assess their benefit. Traditional clinical testing of personalized surgical pain management treatments may be more challenging because individualized solutions tailored to each patient's pain generator can vary extensively. However, high-grade evidence is needed to prompt a protocol change and break with traditional image-based criteria for treatment. In this article, the authors review issues in surgical trials and offer practical solutions.

Indexed as

clinical evidencepain generatorspersonalized care modelssurgical clinical trials

Identifiers

PMID37511657
PMCPMC10381640

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.