Abstract
Background
Outcome selection, measurement and reporting for the evaluation of new surgical procedures and devices is inconsistent and lacks standardization. A core outcome set may promote the safe and transparent evaluation of surgical innovations. This systematic review examined outcome selection, measurement and reporting in studies conducted within the IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment and Long‐term monitoring) framework to examine current practice and inform the development of a core outcome set for early‐phase studies of surgical procedures/devices.
Methods
Web of Science and Scopus citation searches were performed to identify author‐reported IDEAL/IDEAL‐D studies for any surgical procedure/device. Outcomes were extracted verbatim, including contextual information regarding outcome selection and measurement. Outcomes were categorized to inform a conceptual framework of outcome domains relevant to evaluating innovation.
Results
Some 48 studies were identified. Outcome selection, measurement and reporting varied widely across studies in different IDEAL stages. From 1737 outcomes extracted, 22 domains specific to evaluating innovation were conceptualized under seven broad categories: procedure completion success/failure; modifications; unanticipated events; surgeons' experiences; patients' experiences; resource use specific to the innovative procedure/device; and other innovation‐specific outcomes. Most innovation‐specific outcomes were measured and reported in only a small number of studies.
Conclusion
This review highlighted the need for guidance and standardization in outcome selection and reporting in the evaluation of new surgical procedures/devices. Novel outcome domains specific to innovation have been identified to establish a core outcome set for future evaluations of surgical innovations.
Outcome selection, measurement and reporting for the evaluation of new surgical procedures and devices is inconsistent and lacks standardization. A core outcome set may promote the safe and transparent evaluation of surgical innovations. This systematic review examined outcome selection, measurement and reporting in studies conducted within the IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment and Long‐term monitoring) framework to examine current practice and inform the development of a core outcome set for early‐phase studies of surgical procedures/devices.
Methods
Web of Science and Scopus citation searches were performed to identify author‐reported IDEAL/IDEAL‐D studies for any surgical procedure/device. Outcomes were extracted verbatim, including contextual information regarding outcome selection and measurement. Outcomes were categorized to inform a conceptual framework of outcome domains relevant to evaluating innovation.
Results
Some 48 studies were identified. Outcome selection, measurement and reporting varied widely across studies in different IDEAL stages. From 1737 outcomes extracted, 22 domains specific to evaluating innovation were conceptualized under seven broad categories: procedure completion success/failure; modifications; unanticipated events; surgeons' experiences; patients' experiences; resource use specific to the innovative procedure/device; and other innovation‐specific outcomes. Most innovation‐specific outcomes were measured and reported in only a small number of studies.
Conclusion
This review highlighted the need for guidance and standardization in outcome selection and reporting in the evaluation of new surgical procedures/devices. Novel outcome domains specific to innovation have been identified to establish a core outcome set for future evaluations of surgical innovations.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | BJS Open |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 4 Oct 2020 |
Cite this
Macefield, R. C., Wilson, N. M., Hoffmann, C., Blazeby, J. M., Mcnair, A. G. K., Avery, K. N. L., & Potter, S. (2020). Outcome selection, measurement and reporting for new surgical procedures and devices: a systematic review of IDEAL/IDEAL-D studies to inform development of a core outcome set. BJS Open. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50358