RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS IN ORTHOPEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY: SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS ON THE NATIONAL EVIDENCE

Vinícius Ynoe de Moraes; Cesar Domingues Moreira; Marcel Jun Sugawara Tamaoki; Flávio Faloppa; Joao Carlos Belloti

doi:10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30310-4

RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS IN ORTHOPEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY: SYSTEMATIC ANALYSIS ON THE NATIONAL EVIDENCE

Rev Bras Ortop. 2015 Nov 16;45(6):601-5. doi: 10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30310-4. eCollection 2010 Nov-Dec.

Authors

Vinícius Ynoe de Moraes¹, Cesar Domingues Moreira¹, Marcel Jun Sugawara Tamaoki², Flávio Faloppa³, Joao Carlos Belloti⁴

Affiliations

¹ Third-year Resident in the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Federal University of Sao Paulo (Unifesp).
² Physician in the Shoulder and Elbow Sector of the Discipline of the Hand and Upper Limb, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Federal University of Sao Paulo (Unifesp).
³ Titular Professor of the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Federal University of Sao Paulo (Unifesp).
⁴ Adjunct Professor in the Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Federal University of Sao Paulo (Unifesp).

Abstract

Objective: To assess whether there has been any improvement in the quality and quantity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in nationally published journals through the application of standardized and validated scores.

Methods: We electronically selected all RCTs published in the two indexed Brazilian journals that focus on orthopedics, over the period 2000-2009: Acta Ortopédica Brasileira (AOB) and Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (RBO). These RCTs were identified and scored by two independent researchers in accordance with the Jadad scale and the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group score. The studies selected were grouped as follows: 1) publication period (2000-2004 or 2004-2009); 2) journal of publication (AOB or RBO).

Results: Twenty-two papers were selected: 10 from AOB and 12 from RBO. No statistically significant differences were found between the proportions (nRCT/nTotal of published papers) of RCTs published in the two journals (p = 0.458), or in the Jadad score (p = 0.722) and Cochrane score (p = 0.630).

Conclusion: The relative quality and quantity of RCTs in the journals analyzed were similar. There was a trend towards improvement of quality, but there was no increase in the number of RCTs between the two periods analyzed.

Keywords: Evidence-Based Medicine; Methodology; Orthopedics; Randomized Controlled Trials; Traumatology.