Quality of Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials in Blood Conservation After Joint Arthroplasty

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 26, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 909-913

  Sharma, Rajrishi ^a   Farrokhyar, Forough ^a   McKnight, Leslie L ^a   Bhandari, Mohit ^a   Poolman, Rudolph W ^b   Adili, Anthony ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthius ^*  (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Arthroplasty; Blood conservation; Detsky index; Systematic review

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; BIOSTATISTICS; BLOOD CONSERVATION; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; COCHRANE LIBRARY; DETSKY INDEX; EMBASE; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; MEDLINE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PEER REVIEW; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; PREDICTOR VARIABLE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RATING SCALE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME; BLEEDING; EVALUATION; METHODOLOGY; REVIEW; STANDARD; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; BLOOD LOSS, SURGICAL; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84856333824     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: 15328406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.08.014     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Kurtz S., et al. Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:1487.
2. Bozic K., et al. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009, 91:128.
3. Manley M., et al. Effect of volume on total hip arthroplasty revision rates in the united states medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008, 90:2446.
4. Kurtz S., et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89:780.
5. Kagoma Y., et al. Use of antifibrinolytic therapy to reduce transfusion in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery: a systematic review of randomized trials. Thromb Res 2009, 123:687.
6. Ho K., Ismail H. Use of intravenous tranexamic acid to reduce allogenic blood transfusion in total hip and knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. Anaesth Intensive Care 2003, 31:529.
7. Gill B., Rosenstein A. The use of antifibrinolytic agents in total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2006, 21:869.
8. Rosencher N., et al. Orthopedic Surgery Transfusion Hemoglobin European Overview (OSTHEO) study: blood management in elective knee and hip arthroplasty in Europe. Transfusion 2003, 43:459.
9. Cid J., Lozano M. Tranexamic acid reduces allogeneic red cell transfusions in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: results of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Transfusion 2005, 45:1302.
10. Poolman R., et al. Does a "level I evidence" rating imply high quality of reporting in orthopaedic randomised controlled trials?. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006, 6.
11. Moja L., et al. Assessment of methodological quality of primary studies by systematic reviews: results of the metaquality cross sectional study. BMJ 2005, 330:1053.
12. Juni P., et al. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 1999, 282:1054.
13. Moher D., et al. Assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials: an annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials 1995, 16:62.
14. Bhandari M., et al. The quality of reporting of randomized trials in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery from 1988 through 2000. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002, 388.
15. Dulai S., et al. A quality assessment of randomized clinical trials in pediatric orthopaedics. J Pediatr Orthop 2007, 27:573.
16. Poolman R., et al. Reporting of outcomes in orthopaedic randomized trials: does blinding of outcome assessors matter?. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89:550.
17. Jacquier I., et al. The reporting of randomized clinical trials using a surgical intervention is in need of immediate improvement: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2006, 244:677.
18. Soares H., et al. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ 2004, 328:22.
19. Farrokhyar F., et al. A systematic review of the quality of publications reporting coronary artery bypass grafting trials. Can J Surg 2007, 50:266.
20. D'Agostino R., D'Agostino R. Estimating treatment effects using observational data. JAMA 2007, 297:314.
21. Thoma A., et al. The role of the randomized controlled trial in plastic surgery. Clin Plast Surg 2008, 35:275.