Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: doi:10.22028/D291-40223
Title: Randomized Clinical Trials and Observational Tribulations: Providing Clinical Evidence for Personalized Surgical Pain Management Care Models
Author(s): Abraham, Ivo
Lewandrowski, Kai-Uwe
Elfar, John C.
Li, Zong-Ming
Fiorelli, Rossano Kepler Alvim
Pereira, Mauricio G.
Lorio, Morgan P.
Burkhardt, Benedikt W.
Oertel, Joachim M.
Winkler, Peter A.
Yang, Huilin
León, Jorge Felipe Ramírez
Telfeian, Albert E.
Dowling, Álvaro
Vargas, Roth A. A.
Ramina, Ricardo
Asefi, Marjan
de Carvalho, Paulo Sérgio Teixeira
Defino, Helton
Moyano, Jaime
Montemurro, Nicola
Yeung, Anthony
Novellino, Pietro
on behalf of Teams/Organizations/Institutions
Language: English
Title: Journal of Personalized Medicine
Volume: 13
Issue: 7
Publisher/Platform: MDPI
Year of Publication: 2023
Free key words: surgical clinical trials
personalized care models
pain generators
clinical evidence
DDC notations: 610 Medicine and health
Publikation type: Journal Article
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.
DOI of the first publication: 10.3390/jpm13071044
URL of the first publication: https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13071044
Link to this record: urn:nbn:de:bsz:291--ds-402239
hdl:20.500.11880/36183
http://dx.doi.org/10.22028/D291-40223
ISSN: 2075-4426
Date of registration: 7-Aug-2023
Description of the related object: Supplementary Materials
Related object: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jpm13071044/s1
Faculty: M - Medizinische Fakultät
Department: M - Neurochirurgie
Professorship: M - Prof. Dr. Joachim Oertel
Collections:SciDok - Der Wissenschaftsserver der Universität des Saarlandes

Files for this record:
File Description SizeFormat 
jpm-13-01044-v3.pdf940,36 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons