Andrew T Chen, Tara Behroozian, Tal Levit, Faisal Quadri, Patrick J Kim, Lucas Gallo, Jeslyn Chen, Ted Zhou, Dalya Cohen, Emily Dunn, Achilles Thoma
{"title":"从试点试验到完成的整形外科随机对照试验的进展:一项系统综述。","authors":"Andrew T Chen, Tara Behroozian, Tal Levit, Faisal Quadri, Patrick J Kim, Lucas Gallo, Jeslyn Chen, Ted Zhou, Dalya Cohen, Emily Dunn, Achilles Thoma","doi":"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Well-designed pilot trials are essential in determining feasibility prior to initiating definitive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and their implementation into clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study was to identify the number of pilot or feasibility studies in Plastic Surgery that progressed to a definitive RCT. Secondary outcomes included a) number of pilot studies expressing feasibility statements and outcomes and b) reporting quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for all pilot RCTs and definitive RCTs in plastic surgery between 2012-2023. Pilot trials were matched to definitive RCTs by keyword, author, and citation report. Feasibility outcomes were presented using descriptive statistics. Reporting quality was evaluated using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 randomized pilot and feasibility trials extension.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 11,540 and 6035 citations screened in 2 separate literature searches, 171 pilot studies and 779 definitive RCTS were included, respectively. Ten (5.8%) pilot studies were associated with a completed RCT, 4 (2.3%) were in progress, and 2 (1.2%) were stopped. For studies that did not progress to a definitive RCT, \"inadequate funding\" (n = 11, 41.4%) was the most cited reason followed by \"insufficient efficacy to justify study progression\" (n = 5, 17.3%). The average reporting adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials items was 65.6% (SD 16). Fifty (29.2%) pilot RCTs reported a feasibility statement and 30 (17.5%) reported feasibility outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Few pilot trials in plastic surgery progressed to a definitive RCT, and most did not present feasibility statements or outcomes. Pilot studies should precede RCTs and include clear feasibility statements and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":8060,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Progression of Pilot Trials to Completed Randomized Controlled Trials in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Andrew T Chen, Tara Behroozian, Tal Levit, Faisal Quadri, Patrick J Kim, Lucas Gallo, Jeslyn Chen, Ted Zhou, Dalya Cohen, Emily Dunn, Achilles Thoma\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004182\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Well-designed pilot trials are essential in determining feasibility prior to initiating definitive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and their implementation into clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study was to identify the number of pilot or feasibility studies in Plastic Surgery that progressed to a definitive RCT. Secondary outcomes included a) number of pilot studies expressing feasibility statements and outcomes and b) reporting quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for all pilot RCTs and definitive RCTs in plastic surgery between 2012-2023. Pilot trials were matched to definitive RCTs by keyword, author, and citation report. Feasibility outcomes were presented using descriptive statistics. Reporting quality was evaluated using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 randomized pilot and feasibility trials extension.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 11,540 and 6035 citations screened in 2 separate literature searches, 171 pilot studies and 779 definitive RCTS were included, respectively. Ten (5.8%) pilot studies were associated with a completed RCT, 4 (2.3%) were in progress, and 2 (1.2%) were stopped. For studies that did not progress to a definitive RCT, \\\"inadequate funding\\\" (n = 11, 41.4%) was the most cited reason followed by \\\"insufficient efficacy to justify study progression\\\" (n = 5, 17.3%). The average reporting adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials items was 65.6% (SD 16). Fifty (29.2%) pilot RCTs reported a feasibility statement and 30 (17.5%) reported feasibility outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Few pilot trials in plastic surgery progressed to a definitive RCT, and most did not present feasibility statements or outcomes. Pilot studies should precede RCTs and include clear feasibility statements and outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Plastic Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Plastic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004182\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004182","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Progression of Pilot Trials to Completed Randomized Controlled Trials in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review.
Purpose: Well-designed pilot trials are essential in determining feasibility prior to initiating definitive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and their implementation into clinical practice. The primary outcome of this study was to identify the number of pilot or feasibility studies in Plastic Surgery that progressed to a definitive RCT. Secondary outcomes included a) number of pilot studies expressing feasibility statements and outcomes and b) reporting quality.
Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched for all pilot RCTs and definitive RCTs in plastic surgery between 2012-2023. Pilot trials were matched to definitive RCTs by keyword, author, and citation report. Feasibility outcomes were presented using descriptive statistics. Reporting quality was evaluated using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 randomized pilot and feasibility trials extension.
Results: Among 11,540 and 6035 citations screened in 2 separate literature searches, 171 pilot studies and 779 definitive RCTS were included, respectively. Ten (5.8%) pilot studies were associated with a completed RCT, 4 (2.3%) were in progress, and 2 (1.2%) were stopped. For studies that did not progress to a definitive RCT, "inadequate funding" (n = 11, 41.4%) was the most cited reason followed by "insufficient efficacy to justify study progression" (n = 5, 17.3%). The average reporting adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials items was 65.6% (SD 16). Fifty (29.2%) pilot RCTs reported a feasibility statement and 30 (17.5%) reported feasibility outcomes.
Conclusions: Few pilot trials in plastic surgery progressed to a definitive RCT, and most did not present feasibility statements or outcomes. Pilot studies should precede RCTs and include clear feasibility statements and outcomes.
期刊介绍:
The only independent journal devoted to general plastic and reconstructive surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery serves as a forum for current scientific and clinical advances in the field and a sounding board for ideas and perspectives on its future. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original articles, brief communications, case reports, and notes in all areas of interest to the practicing plastic surgeon. There are also historical and current reviews, descriptions of surgical technique, and lively editorials and letters to the editor.