An assessment of the quality of rotator cuff randomized controlled trials: utilizing the Jadad score and CONSORT criteria

McCormick, Frank; Cvetanovich, Gregory L.; Kim, Jaehon M.; Harris, Joshua D.; Gupta, Anil K.; Abrams, Geoff D.; Romeo, Anthony A.; Provencher, Matthew T.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.01.017

Cited by 66 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This methodology has been used in several prior studies and was chosen to focus inclusion on high-impact orthopaedic literature. 1,2,7,8 Six cardinal domains were considered in this literature review, comprising reporting of outcomes related to pain, satisfaction, objective knee function, subjective knee function, patientreported outcomes (PROs), and progression of degenerative joint disease. Any article related to surgical treatment of patients with focal articular cartilage defects of the knee was included for review.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensiveness of Outcome Reporting in Studies of Articular Cartilage Defects of the Knee

Makhni

Meyer

Saltzman

et al. 2016

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensiveness of Outcome Reporting in Studies of Articular Cartilage Defects of the Knee

Makhni

Meyer

Saltzman

et al. 2016

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In one previous systematic review that used the original Jadad scale in assessing the quality of 54 rotator cuff RCTs published from 2001 to 2011, the mean Jadad score was 3.0 [14]. The authors concluded that most trials were of high quality (66% had a Jadad score >3.0) but because almost two-thirds of the high-quality studies were nonoperative trials they suggested that the rotator cuff literature lacks high quality RCTs that are relevant to surgical clinical practice [14].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The authors concluded that most trials were of high quality (66% had a Jadad score >3.0) but because almost two-thirds of the high-quality studies were nonoperative trials they suggested that the rotator cuff literature lacks high quality RCTs that are relevant to surgical clinical practice [14]. In another report based on the “comparative effectiveness of nonoperative and operative treatments for rotator cuff tears” systematic review of literature from 1990 to 2009, the authors concluded that the “RCT literature was of particularly low quality with high risk of bias from the manner in which the studies had been conducted” [15].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intervention randomized controlled trials involving wrist and shoulder arthroscopy: a systematic review

Tadjerbashi

Rosales²,

Atroshi

2014

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAlthough arthroscopy of upper extremity joints was initially a diagnostic tool, it is increasingly used for therapeutic interventions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for assessing treatment efficacy. We aimed to review the literature for intervention RCTs involving wrist and shoulder arthroscopy.MethodsWe performed a systematic review for RCTs in which at least one arm was an intervention performed through wrist arthroscopy or shoulder arthroscopy. PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to December 2012. Two researchers reviewed each article and recorded the condition treated, randomization method, number of randomized participants, time of randomization, outcomes measures, blinding, and description of dropouts and withdrawals. We used the modified Jadad scale that considers the randomization method, blinding, and dropouts/withdrawals; score 0 (lowest quality) to 5 (highest quality). The scores for the wrist and shoulder RCTs were compared with the Mann–Whitney test.ResultsThe first references to both wrist and shoulder arthroscopy appeared in the late 1970s. The search found 4 wrist arthroscopy intervention RCTs (Kienböck’s disease, dorsal wrist ganglia, volar wrist ganglia, and distal radius fracture; first 3 compared arthroscopic with open surgery). The median number of participants was 45. The search found 50 shoulder arthroscopy intervention RCTs (rotator cuff tears 22, instability 14, impingement 9, and other conditions 5). Of these, 31 compared different arthroscopic treatments, 12 compared arthroscopic with open treatment, and 7 compared arthroscopic with nonoperative treatment. The median number of participants was 60. The median modified Jadad score for the wrist RCTs was 0.5 (range 0–1) and for the shoulder RCTs 3.0 (range 0–5) (p = 0.012).ConclusionDespite the increasing use of wrist arthroscopy in the treatment of various wrist disorders the efficacy of arthroscopically performed wrist interventions has been studied in only 4 randomized studies compared to 50 randomized studies of significantly higher quality assessing interventions performed through shoulder arthroscopy.

show abstract

“…Rather, six high-impact journals were chosen, and a comprehensive 10-year search of all issues from these journals was performed by the study team, a strategy used previously to assess data quality [10]. Focusing on these journals across a broad range of subspecialties, we did not seek to perform a comprehensive review, but rather to identify high-quality studies as a way to broadly understand the strengths of recommendation provided in the US health economic literature related to orthopaedics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The journals used for the search were Journal of Sports Medicine, and Spine. We chose these journals because of their high impact and to achieve broad coverage across orthopaedic subspecialties in the United States, a strategy similar to that performed in a prior study on the data quality of rotator cuff interventions [10]. Each issue of these journals from January 1, 2004, through April 1, 2014, was reviewed for the following terms: ''cost'', ''utility'', ''economic'', ''price'', ''cost-effectiveness'', ''cost-utility'', ''decision-making'', ''Medicare'', ''Medicaid'', ''reimburse'', and ''cost-benefit''.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Are the Strength of Recommendations and Methodologic Reporting in Health Economic Studies in Orthopaedic Surgery?

Makhni

Steinhaus

Swart

et al. 2015

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the increasing use of cost-effectiveness studies in orthopaedic surgery, understanding the quality of these studies and the reasons that limit the ability of studies to provide more definitive recommendations is critical. Highlighting the heterogeneity of methodologic reporting practices will aid clinicians in interpreting the conclusions of cost-effectiveness studies and improve future research efforts.

show abstract

An assessment of the quality of rotator cuff randomized controlled trials: utilizing the Jadad score and CONSORT criteria

Cited by 66 publications

References 21 publications

Comprehensiveness of Outcome Reporting in Studies of Articular Cartilage Defects of the Knee

Comprehensiveness of Outcome Reporting in Studies of Articular Cartilage Defects of the Knee

Intervention randomized controlled trials involving wrist and shoulder arthroscopy: a systematic review

What Are the Strength of Recommendations and Methodologic Reporting in Health Economic Studies in Orthopaedic Surgery?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About