Literature DB >> 29052083

Patient-specific devices and population-level evidence: evaluating therapeutic interventions with inherent variation.

Mary Jean Walker1,2.   

Abstract

Designing and manufacturing medical devices for specific patients is becoming increasingly feasible with developments in 3D printing and 3D imaging software. This raises the question of how patient-specific devices can be evaluated, since our 'gold standard' method for evaluation, the randomised controlled trial (RCT), requires that an intervention is standardised across a number of individuals in an experimental group. I distinguish several senses of patient-specific device, and focus the discussion on understanding the problem of variations between instances of an intervention for RCT evaluation. I argue that, despite initial appearances, it is theoretically possible to use RCTs to evaluate some patient-specific medical devices. However, the argument reveals significant difficulties for ensuring the validity of such trials, with implications for how we should think about methods of evidence gathering and regulatory approaches for these technologies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D printing; Medical device; Personalised medicine; Randomised controlled trial; Regulation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29052083     DOI: 10.1007/s11019-017-9807-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Health Care Philos        ISSN: 1386-7423


  32 in total

1.  Complex interventions: how "out of control" can a randomised controlled trial be?

Authors:  Penelope Hawe; Alan Shiell; Therese Riley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-06-26

Review 2.  Randomised trials in surgery: the burden of evidence.

Authors:  Kristoffer Lassen; Anne Hϕye; Truls Myrmel
Journal:  Rev Recent Clin Trials       Date:  2012-08

3.  A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers.

Authors:  Kevin E Thorpe; Merrick Zwarenstein; Andrew D Oxman; Shaun Treweek; Curt D Furberg; Douglas G Altman; Sean Tunis; Eduardo Bergel; Ian Harvey; David J Magid; Kalipso Chalkidou
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Outcome of custom-made IMP femoral components of total hip arthroplasty: a follow-up of 15 to 22 years.

Authors:  Sascha Colen; Alain Dalemans; Anne Schouwenaars; Michiel Mulier
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 4.757

5.  Causality in medicine: getting back to the Hill top.

Authors:  John Worrall
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 4.018

6.  Notes on the use of randomised controlled trials to evaluate complex interventions: Community treatment orders as an illustrative case.

Authors:  Feras Ali Mustafa
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 2.431

7.  Print Me an Organ? Ethical and Regulatory Issues Emerging from 3D Bioprinting in Medicine.

Authors:  Frederic Gilbert; Cathal D O'Connell; Tajanka Mladenovska; Susan Dodds
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.525

8.  Improved accuracy of alignment with patient-specific positioning guides compared with manual instrumentation in TKA.

Authors:  Vincent Y Ng; Jeffrey H DeClaire; Keith R Berend; Bethany C Gulick; Adolph V Lombardi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Shape the implant to the patient. A rationale for the use of custom-fit cementless total hip implants.

Authors:  W L Bargar
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 10.  Ethics and evidence based surgery.

Authors:  G M Stirrat
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.903

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.