A Wattiez, L Schindler, A Ussia, R Campo, J Keckstein, G Grimbizis, C Exacoustos, W Kondo, C Nezhat, M Canis, R L De Wilde, C Miller, A Fazel, B Rabischong, A Graziottin, P R Koninckx
{"title":"子宫内膜异位症的经验管理可以补充循证指南的概念证明。","authors":"A Wattiez, L Schindler, A Ussia, R Campo, J Keckstein, G Grimbizis, C Exacoustos, W Kondo, C Nezhat, M Canis, R L De Wilde, C Miller, A Fazel, B Rabischong, A Graziottin, P R Koninckx","doi":"10.52054/FVVO.15.3.094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Management of endometriosis should be based on the best available evidence. The pyramid of evidence reflects unbiased observations analysed with traditional statistics. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the clinical interpretation of these data by experts. Unfortunately, traditional statistical inference can refute but cannot confirm a hypothesis and clinical experience is considered a personal opinion.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>A proof of concept to document clinical experience by considering each diagnosis and treatment as an experiment with an outcome, which is used to update subsequent management.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Experience and knowledge-based questions were answered on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) by surgery-oriented clinicians with experience of > 50 surgeries for endometriosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The answers reflect the collective clinical experience of managing >10.000 women with endometriosis. Experience-based management was overall comparable as approved by >75% of answers rated ≥ 8/10 VAS. Knowledge-based management was more variable, reflecting debated issues and differences between experts and non-experts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The collective experience-based management of those with endometriosis is similar for surgery-oriented clinicians. Results do not conflict with EBM and are a Bayesian prior, to be confirmed, refuted or updated by further observations.</p><p><strong>What is new?: </strong>Collective experience-based management can be measured and is more than a personal opinion. This might extend EBM trial results to the entire population and add data difficult to obtain in RCTs, such as many aspects of surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":46400,"journal":{"name":"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn","volume":"15 3","pages":"197-214"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10643008/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A proof of concept that experience-based management of endometriosis can complement evidence-based guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"A Wattiez, L Schindler, A Ussia, R Campo, J Keckstein, G Grimbizis, C Exacoustos, W Kondo, C Nezhat, M Canis, R L De Wilde, C Miller, A Fazel, B Rabischong, A Graziottin, P R Koninckx\",\"doi\":\"10.52054/FVVO.15.3.094\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Management of endometriosis should be based on the best available evidence. The pyramid of evidence reflects unbiased observations analysed with traditional statistics. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the clinical interpretation of these data by experts. Unfortunately, traditional statistical inference can refute but cannot confirm a hypothesis and clinical experience is considered a personal opinion.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>A proof of concept to document clinical experience by considering each diagnosis and treatment as an experiment with an outcome, which is used to update subsequent management.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Experience and knowledge-based questions were answered on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) by surgery-oriented clinicians with experience of > 50 surgeries for endometriosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The answers reflect the collective clinical experience of managing >10.000 women with endometriosis. Experience-based management was overall comparable as approved by >75% of answers rated ≥ 8/10 VAS. Knowledge-based management was more variable, reflecting debated issues and differences between experts and non-experts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The collective experience-based management of those with endometriosis is similar for surgery-oriented clinicians. Results do not conflict with EBM and are a Bayesian prior, to be confirmed, refuted or updated by further observations.</p><p><strong>What is new?: </strong>Collective experience-based management can be measured and is more than a personal opinion. This might extend EBM trial results to the entire population and add data difficult to obtain in RCTs, such as many aspects of surgery.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn\",\"volume\":\"15 3\",\"pages\":\"197-214\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10643008/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52054/FVVO.15.3.094\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facts Views and Vision in ObGyn","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52054/FVVO.15.3.094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
A proof of concept that experience-based management of endometriosis can complement evidence-based guidelines.
Background: Management of endometriosis should be based on the best available evidence. The pyramid of evidence reflects unbiased observations analysed with traditional statistics. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the clinical interpretation of these data by experts. Unfortunately, traditional statistical inference can refute but cannot confirm a hypothesis and clinical experience is considered a personal opinion.
Objectives: A proof of concept to document clinical experience by considering each diagnosis and treatment as an experiment with an outcome, which is used to update subsequent management.
Materials and methods: Experience and knowledge-based questions were answered on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) by surgery-oriented clinicians with experience of > 50 surgeries for endometriosis.
Results: The answers reflect the collective clinical experience of managing >10.000 women with endometriosis. Experience-based management was overall comparable as approved by >75% of answers rated ≥ 8/10 VAS. Knowledge-based management was more variable, reflecting debated issues and differences between experts and non-experts.
Conclusions: The collective experience-based management of those with endometriosis is similar for surgery-oriented clinicians. Results do not conflict with EBM and are a Bayesian prior, to be confirmed, refuted or updated by further observations.
What is new?: Collective experience-based management can be measured and is more than a personal opinion. This might extend EBM trial results to the entire population and add data difficult to obtain in RCTs, such as many aspects of surgery.