Complication Reporting in Orthopaedic Trials: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Goldhahn, S.; Sawaguchi, T.; Audigé, L.; Mundi, R.; Hanson, B.; Bhandari, M.; Goldhahn, J.
August 2009
Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;Aug2009, Vol. 91-A Issue 8, p1847
Academic Journal
Background: The nature and frequency of complications during or after orthopaedic interventions represent critical clinical information for safety evaluations, which are required for the development or improvement of orthopaedic care. The goal of this systematic review was to check whether essential data regarding the assessment of the prevalence, severity, and characteristics of complications related to orthopaedic interventions are consistently provided by the authors of papers on randomized controlled trials. Methods: Five major peer-reviewed orthopaedic journals were screened for randomized controlled trials published between January 2006 and July 2007. All relevant papers were obtained, anonymized, and evaluated by two external reviewers. A checklist consisting of three main parts (definition, evaluation, and reporting) was developed and applied for the assessment of complication reporting. The results were stratified into surgical and nonsurgical categories. Results: One hundred and twelve randomized controlled trials were identified. Although complications were included as trial outcomes in two-thirds of the studies, clear definitions of anticipated complications were provided in only eight trials. In 83% of the trials, the person or group assessing the complications was not identified. No trial involved a data safety review board for assessment and classification of complications. Conclusions: The lack of homogeneity among the published studies that we reviewed indicates that improvement in the reporting of complications in orthopaedic clinical trials is necessary. A standardized protocol for assessing and reporting complications should be developed and endorsed by professional organizations and, most importantly, by clinical investigators.


Related Articles

  • PREVENT III and IV Trials of E2F Decoy: What Have We Learned? Conte, Michael S. // Vascular;Nov2005 Supplement, Vol. 13, pS23 

    The article describes the outcome of two phase III clinical trials of edifoligide (E2F decoy) for the prevention of vein graft failure. Animal studies of the E2F decoy strategy showed that the procedure inhibits hyperplasia and graft atherosclerosis in rabbits. However, the two clinical trials...

  • Reply. Tan, J H Y // Eye;Jul2003, Vol. 17 Issue 5, p680 

    This article focuses on the study which is a measure of visual outcome in patients undergoing complicated phacoemulsification cataract surgery requiring an anterior vitrectomy. In an attempt to isolate the effect of anterior vitrectomy on the visual outcome of cataract surgery, researchers...

  • Rationale, design, and protocol for the prevention of low back pain in the military (POLM) trial (NCT00373009). George, Steven Z.; Childs, John D.; Teyhen, Deydre S.; Wu, Samuel S.; Wright, Alison C.; Dugan, Jessica L.; Robinson, Michael E. // BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders;2007, Vol. 8, p92 

    Background: There are few effective strategies reported for the primary prevention of low back pain (LBP). Core stabilization exercises targeting the deep abdominal and trunk musculature and psychosocial education programs addressing patient beliefs and coping styles represent the current best...

  • The American Orthopaedic Association Clinical Trials Curriculum. Diamond, Ivan R.; Murray, Camille; Bosse, Michael J.; Heckman, James D.; Mirza, Sohail K.; Peabody, Terrance D.; Saleh, Khaled J.; Swiontkowski, Marc F.; Wright, James G. // Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;Apr2009, Vol. 91-A Issue 4, p1007 

    The article presents an overview of the rationale, objectives and design of a curriculum which was developed by the American Orthopedic Association in an effort to facilitate the advancement of clinical trials in orthopedics. An evaluation of the curriculum is offered. The importance of having...

  • Full Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Wechsler, Jill // Applied Clinical Trials;Jul2000, Vol. 9 Issue 7, p22 

    Focuses on efforts to increase safeguards for people participating in clinical trials in the United States. Concerns over the adequacy of investigator financial disclosure requirements; Call made by the Department of Health and Human Services for a clarification of policies to avoid conflicts...

  • NETLINES. Brown, Harry // BMJ: British Medical Journal (International Edition);11/27/2004, Vol. 329 Issue 7477, p1293 

    Offers a number of web sites which focus on medical topics. Trauma Imagebank; Clinical practice guidelines from the site of the Royal Children's Hospital in Australia; Information for patients participating in clinical trials at the National Electronic Library for Health; Management of...

  • Canadian soldiers used as `guinea pigs'?  // CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal;6/29/99, Vol. 160 Issue 13, p1814 

    States that an unapproved antimalarial drug, Mefloquine, was given to Canadian soldiers, who were bound for Somalia. Concern that prescribed safety-monitoring protocol was not followed during clinical trials in 1992-1993; Common adverse effects.

  • Animal studies in drug safety evaluation. Heywood, Ralph // Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine;Sep1978, Vol. 71 Issue 9, p686 

    The article focuses on the animal studies in evaluating drug safety. Drug safety evaluation is reserved for those predictive animal studies conducted on new medicines. Such experiments are normally prerequisite to the granting of clinical trial certificates for assessment in human volunteers...

  • Rules for drug trials should be tightened, say experts. Kmietowicz, Zosia // BMJ: British Medical Journal (International Edition);8/5/2006, Vol. 332 Issue 7562, p276 

    The article offers a news brief about a report by the British government's Commission on Human Medicines that says that new high-risk drugs in phase I studies should be given to a single person at a time with observation time between doses. Phase I studies are the first time drugs are tested in...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics