The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT): better presentation of surgical trials in the Journal of Hand Surgery

In-house 3D-printed custom splints for non-operative treatment of distal radial fractures: a randomized controlled trial

We compared patient satisfaction and clinical effectiveness of 3D-printed splints made of photopolymer resin to conventional fibre glass casts in treating distal radial fractures. A total of 39 patients with minimally displaced distal radius fractures were included and randomized. Of them, 20 were immobilized in a fibre glass cast and 19 in a 3D-printed forearm splint. The 3D-printed splints were custom-designed based on forearm surface scanning with a handheld device and printed in-house using digital light processing printing technology. Patient satisfaction and clinical effectiveness were assessed with questionnaires 1 and 6 weeks after the initiation of immobilization. Fracture healing, pain, range of motion, grip strength and the DASH and PRWE scores were assessed up to 1-year follow-up. 3D-printed splints proved to be equally well tolerated by the patients and equally clinically effective as conventional fibre glass casts although there was a higher rate of minor complications. 3D-printed splints present a safe alternative, especially in young, active patients, for non-operative treatment of distal radial fractures.Level of evidence: I.

Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials for Surgical Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials are considered the gold standard in evidence-based medicine. The authors conducted a systematic review to evaluate the quantity, quality, and trends of randomized controlled trials that assess surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome.

METHODS

The authors identified randomized controlled trials comparing two or more surgical interventions for carpal tunnel syndrome in PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Two independent reviewers evaluated articles for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed randomized controlled trial quality using the Jadad score.

RESULTS

Of 2253 identified studies, 58 met full inclusion criteria. They were published between 1985 and 2015, with a significant increase over time (p = 0.003). They were most frequently published in Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) [n = 15 (25.9 percent)]. Most randomized controlled trials were single-center studies [n = 54 (93.1 percent)] conducted in the United Kingdom [n = 13 (22.4 percent)] or the United States [n = 10 (17.2 percent)], with a mean study size of 80.1 ± 55.5 patients. Funding source was unknown in 62.1 percent (n = 36). Three-quarters [n = 44 (75.9 percent)] of randomized controlled trials did not define the primary outcome measure(s). Less than 30 percent (n = 17) of randomized controlled trials conducted a power analysis. Only four studies with patients reported lost to follow-up provided an explanation for each patient. Six randomized controlled trials (10.3 percent) conducted intention-to-treat analysis. The mean Jadad score was 2.14 ± 1.26, with no significant improvement over time (p = 0.245).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the significant increase in the number of randomized controlled trials published studying surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome over time, a mean Jadad score of 2.14 with no change over time indicates a need for improvement in quality. Proper study design is key to avoiding introduction of bias and ensuring the validity of conclusions drawn.

Quality of surgical randomized controlled trials in hand surgery: a systematic review

We assessed the quantity, quality and trends of randomized controlled trials comparing hand surgical interventions. Study characteristics were collected for 125 randomized controlled trials comparing hand surgical interventions. The Jadad scale (0-5), which assesses methodological quality of trials, was calculated. Logistic regressions were conducted to determine associations with the Jadad score. The studies were published between 1981 and 2015, with an increase over time, most often in Journal of Hand Surgery (European). Mean study size was 68 patients. Mean Jadad score was 2.1, without improvement over time. Thirty percent conducted a power analysis and 8% an intention-to-treat analysis. Studies conducted in the United Kingdom and with smaller sample sizes, power analysis and intention-to-treat analysis were associated with a higher Jadad score. The quantity of trials has increased over time while methodological quality has remained low, indicating a need to improve quality of trials in hand surgery literature.

WITHDRAWN: Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral analgesics, is no longer adequate in reducing disability and pain. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different surgical techniques for trapeziometacarpal (thumb) osteoarthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to 08 August 2013: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), CINAHL (1982 to August 2013), Clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) and World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Portal (to August 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs where the intervention was surgery for people with thumb osteoarthritis. Outcomes were pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors independently screened and included studies according to the inclusion criteria, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, including adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with 670 participants. Seven surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty (IA), Artelon joint resurfacing, arthrodesis and Swanson joint replacement). We did not find any studies that compared surgery with sham surgery or surgery with non-surgical interventions.Most included studies had an unclear risk of most biases which raises doubt about the results. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure (re-operation) or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. One study demonstrated a difference in adverse events (mild-moderate swelling) between Artelon joint replacement and trapeziectomy with tendon interposition. However, the quality of evidence was very low due to a high risk of bias and imprecision of results.Low quality evidence suggests trapeziectomy with LRTI may not provide additional benefits or result in more adverse events over trapeziectomy alone. Mean pain (three studies, 162 participants) was 26 mm on a 0 to 100 mm VAS (0 is no pain) for trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI reduced pain by a mean of 2.8 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to 4.2) or an absolute reduction of 3% (-10% to 4%). Mean physical function (three studies, 211 participants) was 31.1 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (0 is best physical function, or no disability) with trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in sightly lower function scores (standardised mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.32), an equivalent to a worsening of 0.2 points (95% CI -5.8 to 6.1) on a 0 to 100 point scale (absolute decrease in function 0.03% (-0.83% to 0.88%)). Low quality evidence from four studies (328 participants) indicates that the mean number of adverse events was 10 per 100 participants for trapeziectomy alone, and 19 events per 100 participants for trapeziectomy with LRTI (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.73) or an absolute risk increase of 9% (95% CI 0% to 28%). Low quality evidence from one study (42 participants) indicates that the mean scapho-metacarpal distance was 2.3 mm for the trapeziectomy alone group, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in a mean of 0.1 mm less distance (95% CI -0.81 to 0.61). None of the included trials reported global assessment, quality of life, and revision or re-operation rates.Low-quality evidence from two small studies (51 participants) indicated that trapeziectomy with LRTI may not improve function or slow joint degeneration, or produce additional adverse events over trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction.We are uncertain of the benefits or harms of other surgical techniques due to the mostly low quality evidence from single studies and the low reporting rates of key outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with LRTI had additional benefit over arthrodesis or trapeziectomy with IA. There was also insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with IA had any additional benefit over the Artelon joint implant, the Swanson joint replacement or trapeziectomy alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any studies that compared surgery to sham surgery or to non-operative treatments. We were unable to demonstrate that any technique confers a benefit over another technique in terms of pain and physical function. Furthermore, the included studies were not of high enough quality to provide conclusive evidence that the compared techniques provided equivalent outcomes.

Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral analgesics, is no longer adequate in reducing disability and pain. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different surgical techniques for trapeziometacarpal (thumb) osteoarthritis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following sources up to 08 August 2013: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), CINAHL (1982 to August 2013), Clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) and World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Portal (to August 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs where the intervention was surgery for people with thumb osteoarthritis. Outcomes were pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. We excluded trials that compared non-surgical interventions with surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors independently screened and included studies according to the inclusion criteria, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, including adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies with 670 participants. Seven surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty (IA), Artelon joint resurfacing, arthrodesis and Swanson joint replacement).Most included studies had an unclear risk of most biases which raises doubt about the results. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure (re-operation) or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. One study demonstrated a difference in adverse events (mild-moderate swelling) between Artelon joint replacement and trapeziectomy with tendon interposition. However, the quality of evidence was very low due to a high risk of bias and imprecision of results.Low quality evidence suggests trapeziectomy with LRTI may not provide additional benefits or result in more adverse events over trapeziectomy alone. Mean pain (three studies, 162 participants) was 26 mm on a 0 to 100 mm VAS (0 is no pain) for trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI reduced pain by a mean of 2.8 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to 4.2) or an absolute reduction of 3% (-10% to 4%). Mean physical function (three studies, 211 participants) was 31.1 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (0 is best physical function, or no disability) with trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in sightly lower function scores (standardised mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.32), an equivalent to a worsening of 0.2 points (95% CI -5.8 to 6.1) on a 0 to 100 point scale (absolute decrease in function 0.03% (-0.83% to 0.88%)). Low quality evidence from four studies (328 participants) indicates that the mean number of adverse events was 10 per 100 participants for trapeziectomy alone, and 19 events per 100 participants for trapeziectomy with LRTI (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.73) or an absolute risk increase of 9% (95% CI 0% to 28%). Low quality evidence from one study (42 participants) indicates that the mean scapho-metacarpal distance was 2.3 mm for the trapeziectomy alone group, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in a mean of 0.1 mm less distance (95% CI -0.81 to 0.61). None of the included trials reported global assessment, quality of life, and revision or re-operation rates.Low-quality evidence from two small studies (51 participants) indicated that trapeziectomy with LRTI may not improve function or slow joint degeneration, or produce additional adverse events over trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction.We are uncertain of the benefits or harms of other surgical techniques due to the mostly low quality evidence from single studies and the low reporting rates of key outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with LRTI had additional benefit over arthrodesis or trapeziectomy with IA. There was also insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with IA had any additional benefit over the Artelon joint implant, the Swanson joint replacement or trapeziectomy alone.We did not find any studies that compared any other combination of the other techniques mentioned above or any other techniques including a sham procedure.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not identify any studies that compared surgery to sham surgery and we excluded studies that compared surgery to non-operative treatments. We were unable to demonstrate that any technique confers a benefit over another technique in terms of pain and physical function. Furthermore, the included studies were not of high enough quality to provide conclusive evidence that the compared techniques provided equivalent outcomes.

High-dosage tamoxifen as neoadjuvant treatment in minimally invasive surgery for Dupuytren disease in patients with a strong predisposition toward fibrosis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Tamoxifen, a synthetic nonsteroidal anti-estrogen known to modulate the production of transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β), has demonstrated effectiveness on fibroblast activity in vitro and in vivo. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of tamoxifen on the outcome of surgery for Dupuytren contractures in patients with a strong predisposition toward fibrosis.

METHODS

We used a prospective, randomized, double-blind study protocol (conforming to the CONSORT standards) to investigate the influence of tamoxifen compared with placebo on the total passive extension deficit in the finger and patient satisfaction after subtotal fasciectomy in thirty patients with a strong predisposition toward fibrosis (grade, >4 according to the Abe scale). High-dosage tamoxifen (80 mg/day) was administered from six weeks prior until twelve weeks after surgery, and patients were monitored for two years.

RESULTS

Three months after surgery, patients in the tamoxifen group had a smaller total passive extension deficit and higher satisfaction compared with the placebo group. This positive effect was lost over the two years following cessation of the medication.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that the short-term outcome of Dupuytren disease treatment could be influenced by use of tamoxifen as a neoadjuvant from six weeks prior to three months after subtotal fasciectomy in patients with a strong predisposition toward fibrosis. However, the beneficial effect disappeared within two years after surgery, with worsening of the contractures after the medication was discontinued. Thus, tamoxifen may have a short-term effect on the outcome of surgery for Dupuytren disease.

Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials from two leading cancer journals using the CONSORT statement

BACKGROUND

No study has been conducted on the scientific quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the cancer field. Our objective was to determine whether adherence to the Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement is associated with scientific properties of RCT reports from two leading cancer journals.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study of RCTs published between 2002 and 2004 in two leading cancer journals that did not endorse the CONSORT statement during that period. We determined the adherence rates with confidence intervals of 33 RCTs according to the 19 methodological items of the CONSORT statement. Each RCT was blindly assessed by three independent evaluators; then the evaluators examined all judgments sequentially and obtained a consensus regarding each methodological item of the CONSORT statement.

RESULTS

The average adherence of these 33 RCTs to the 19 methodological items of the CONSORT statement was 79.3% (95% CI, 75.3-83.4%). Most descriptors from the checklist were determined to be methodologically adequate except sequence generation (56.1%; 95% CI, 40.9-71.3%), allocation concealment (27.3%; 95% CI, 13.2-41.4%), implementation (7.6%; 95% CI, 0.0-15.4%), blinding (30.3%; 95% CI, 14.4-46.3%) and sample size (74.2%; 95% CI, 59.5-89.0%). Of all CONSORT checklist items, randomization implementation was the most often omitted.

CONCLUSION

Some key methodological items of the CONSORT statement seem poorly addressed in RCTs from these leading cancer journals. Thus researchers should be urged to conform to the CONSORT statement when reporting on RCTs, and the poorly addressed items of the CONSORT statement should be reevaluated for RCTs already reported.

Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005. Surgery has been used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb. However, there is no evidence to suggest that any one surgical procedure is superior to another.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of different surgical techniques in reducing pain and improving physical function, patient global assessment, range of motion and strength in people with trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis at 12 months. Additionally, to investigate whether there was any improvement or deterioration in outcomes between the 12-month review and five year follow up.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched:(CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, issue 1), MEDLINE (1950 to Dec 2008), CINAHL (1982 to Dec 2008), AMED (1985 to Dec 2008) and EMBASE (1974 to Dec 2008), and performed handsearching of conference proceedings and reference lists from reviews and papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised trials where the intervention was surgery and pain, physical function, patient global assessment, range of motion or strength was measured as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies according to the inclusion criteria, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, including adverse effects. We contacted trial authors for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine studies involving 477 participants. Seven surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty, Artelon joint resurfacing, arthrodesis and joint replacement). Studies reported results of a mixed group of participants with Stage II-IV osteoarthritis, with a range of improvement for pain and physical function. The majority of studies included in this review had an unclear risk of bias which raises some doubt about the results. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, patient global assessment or range of motion. Of participants who underwent trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition, 22% had adverse effects (including scar tenderness, tendon adhesion or rupture, sensory change, or Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (Type 1)) compared to 10% who underwent trapeziectomy. Trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition is therefore associated with 12% more adverse effects (RR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.18 to 4.15).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although it appears that no one procedure produces greater benefit in terms of pain and physical function, there was insufficient evidence to be conclusive. Trapeziectomy has fewer complications than trapeziectomy with LRTI.

Randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery: a 20-year review of reporting standards, methodologic quality, and impact

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery have not been analyzed comprehensively. We analyzed plastic surgical randomized controlled trials with respect to reporting standards, methodologic quality, and impact on the specialty.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials published from 1986 to 2006 in three major plastic surgery journals were scored for quality and impact using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials checklist, the Jadad criteria, citation numbers, and other parameters. The associations between the quality scores and multiple independent parameters, including trial impact, were explored. The relative impact of randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery was compared with that in other specialties.

RESULTS

A total of 163 randomized controlled trials were evaluated. The average Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Jadad scores were 49 percent and 2.3, respectively. There were deficiencies in the reporting of parameters that influence bias and statistical significance. Randomized controlled trials with high impact or high methodologic quality had higher reporting scores. However, the quality and impact scores did not correlate with the number of participants, subject category, country of origin, or year or journal of publication. Nonsurgical trials had significantly higher quality and impact than surgical trials. Randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery had relatively lower impact as compared with randomized controlled trials in other specialties.

CONCLUSIONS

The reporting and methodologic standards of randomized controlled trials in plastic surgery need improvement. Standards could be improved if well-accepted reporting and methodologic criteria are considered when designing and evaluating randomized controlled trials. Instituting higher standards may improve the impact of randomized controlled trials and make them more influential in plastic surgery.

Evidence-based hand surgery: the role of Cochrane reviews

A detailed literature search was performed to investigate whether the increasing importance of evidence-based hand surgery is reflected in the actual status of Cochrane reviews. Fourteen Cochrane reviews were found and evaluated. Of these, five reviews were in the field of distal radial fractures and four concerned carpal tunnel syndrome. Cochrane reviews were also found for antibiotic treatment, rehabilitation after flexor tendon injuries, mallet finger injuries, little finger metacarpal neck fractures and thumb joint arthritis. All 14 reviews were compromised by methodological flaws and significant clinical heterogeneity of the included studies. Within most reviews the underlying evidence was insufficient and only a very limited number of clinical recommendations could be made. In conclusion, the existing Cochrane reviews in the field of hand surgery show both an increasing interest in establishing systematically summarised knowledge and an enormous demand for good-quality randomised controlled trials.

Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Surgery has been used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb. However, there is no evidence to suggest that any one surgical procedure is superior to another.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of surgery in reducing pain and improving physical function, patient global assessment, range of motion, and strength in people with trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis at 12 months. Additionally, it was the reviewers intention to investigate whether there was any improvement or deterioration in outcomes between the 12 months review and a 5 year follow-up.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the the following databases in the Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 4: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) as well as MEDLINE (1966-Dec 2004), CINAHL (1982-Dec 2004), AMED (1985-Dec 2004), and EMBASE (1974-Dec 2004). Database searches were supplemented by hand searching conference proceedings and reference lists from reviews and papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were: randomised, quasi-randomised or controlled trials; intervention was surgery; and pain, physical function, patient global assessment, range of motion, or strength was measured as an outcome.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers examined the identified studies according to the inclusion criteria. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality and then data, including adverse effects, was extracted and cross-checked. Authors were contacted to provide missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies involving 384 participants were included. Studies of five surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), and joint replacement). All studies reported results of a mixed group of participants with Stage II-IV osteoarthritis, with a range of improvement across all stages of 27 to 57 mm on a 0-100 VAS scale for pain and 18-24 mm on a 0-100 VAS scale for physical function. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, patient global assessment, range of motion or strength. However, participants who underwent trapeziectomy had 16% fewer adverse effects (p=0<.001) than the other commonly-used procedures studied in this review; conversely, those who underwent trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition had 11% more (p=0.03) (including scar tenderness, tendon adhesion or rupture, sensory change, or Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (Type 1).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No one procedure produced greater strength than any other. Although this also appears to be the case for pain and physical function, there was insufficient evidence to be conclusive. Trapeziectomy is safer and has fewer complications than the other procedures studied in this review, and conversely trapeziectomy with LRTI has more.