OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of paediatric surgical interventions that are evidence-based and to identify areas where randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or further research are required. DESIGN: Prospective review of paediatric general surgical inpatients. SETTING: A regional paediatric surgical unit. SUBJECTS: All consecutive paediatric general surgical patients admitted in November, 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Each patient on whom a diagnosis had been made was allocated a primary diagnosis and primary intervention (n = 281). On the basis of expert knowledge, Plusnet Medline, and ISI Science Citation database searches, each intervention was categorised according to the level of supporting evidence: category 1, intervention based on RCT evidence; category 2, intervention with convincing non-experimental evidence such that an RCT would be unethical and unjustified; category 3, intervention without substantial supportive evidence. RESULTS: Of 281 patient interventions, 31 (11%) were based on controlled trials and 185 (66%) on convincing non-experimental evidence. Only 23% of interventions were category 3. CONCLUSIONS: In common with other medical specialties, the majority of paediatric surgical interventions are based on sound evidence. However, only 11% of interventions are based on RCT data, perhaps reflecting the nature of surgical practice. Further RCTs or research is indicated in a proportion of category 3 interventions.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the proportion of paediatric surgical interventions that are evidence-based and to identify areas where randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or further research are required. DESIGN: Prospective review of paediatric general surgical inpatients. SETTING: A regional paediatric surgical unit. SUBJECTS: All consecutive paediatric general surgical patients admitted in November, 1995. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Each patient on whom a diagnosis had been made was allocated a primary diagnosis and primary intervention (n = 281). On the basis of expert knowledge, Plusnet Medline, and ISI Science Citation database searches, each intervention was categorised according to the level of supporting evidence: category 1, intervention based on RCT evidence; category 2, intervention with convincing non-experimental evidence such that an RCT would be unethical and unjustified; category 3, intervention without substantial supportive evidence. RESULTS: Of 281 patient interventions, 31 (11%) were based on controlled trials and 185 (66%) on convincing non-experimental evidence. Only 23% of interventions were category 3. CONCLUSIONS: In common with other medical specialties, the majority of paediatric surgical interventions are based on sound evidence. However, only 11% of interventions are based on RCT data, perhaps reflecting the nature of surgical practice. Further RCTs or research is indicated in a proportion of category 3 interventions.
Authors: S Kitano; Y Iso; M Hashizume; H Yamaga; N Koyanagi; H Wada; T Iwanaga; M Ohta; K Sugimachi Journal: Hepatology Date: 1992-01 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: G Tryfonas; A Violaki; G Tsikopoulos; P Avtzoglou; J Zioutis; C Limas; G Gregoriadis; M Badouraki Journal: J Pediatr Surg Date: 1994-04 Impact factor: 2.545
Authors: P W Plaisier; R L van der Hul; H G Nijs; R den Toom; O T Terpstra; H A Bruining Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 1994-05 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: M C Rudolf; N Lyth; A Bundle; G Rowland; A Kelly; S Bosson; M Garner; P Guest; M Khan; R Thazin; T Bennett; D Damman; V Cove; V Kaur Journal: Arch Dis Child Date: 1999-03 Impact factor: 3.791
Authors: Jeffrey R Darst; Jane W Newburger; Stephen Resch; Rahul H Rathod; James E Lock Journal: Congenit Heart Dis Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.007
Authors: Hans Skari; Kristin Bjornland; Bjorn Frenckner; Lars Goran Friberg; Marja Heikkinen; Timo Hurme; Borger Loe; Gunnhild Mollerlokken; Ole Henrik Nielsen; Niels Qvist; Risto Rintala; Katarina Sandgren; Willy Serlo; Kari Wagner; Tomas Wester; Ragnhild Emblem Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2004-05-20 Impact factor: 1.827