Abstract
In contrast to observational study designs, interventional studies manipulate clinical care to evaluate treatment effects on outcomes. Although surgeons have often relied on observational studies to establish the efficacy and effectiveness of operative and perioperative interventions, observational studies (also referred to as case series) are limited to demonstrating the correlation between the outcome of interest and the procedure. Prospective controlled interventional trials will provide a higher level of evidence for a true cause-and-effect relationship.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M, Lovett B, Griffin D. Randomized trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ 2002;324:1448–1451.
Macklin R. The ethical problems with sham surgery in clinical research. New Engl J Med 1999;341:992–996.
Curry JI, Reeves B, Stringer MD. Randomized controlled trials in pediatric surgery: could we do better? J Pediatric Surg 2003;38(4):556–559.
Peduzzi P, Concato J, Feinstein AR, Holford TR. Importance of events per independent variable in proportional hazards regression analysis. II. Accuracy and precision of regression estimates. J Clin Epidemiol 1995: 48:1503–1510.
Moseley JB, O’ Malley K, Petersen NJ, et al. A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. N Engl J Med 2002;347:81–88.
Kunz R, Oxman AD. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomized and non-randomized clinical trials. BMJ 1998;317:1185–1190.
Flum DR, Dellinger EP, Cheadle A, Chan L, Koepsell T. Intraoperative cholangiography and risk of common bile duct injury during cholecystectomy. JAMA 2003;289:1639–1644.
Marschall G, Shroyer AL, Grover FL, Hammermeister KE. Time series monitors of outcomes: a new dimension for measuring quality of care. Med Care 1998;36:348–356.
Olschewski M, Scheurlen H. Comprehensive cohort study: an alternative to randomized consent design in a breast preservation trial. Methods Inf Med 1985;24:131–134.
Torgerson DJ, Sibbald B. Understanding controlled trials: what is a patient preference trial? BMJ 1998;316:360–361.
CASS Principal Investigators and their Associates. Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Comparability of entry characteristics and survival in randomized and non-randomized patients meeting randomization criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984;3:114–128.
Olschewski M, Schumacher M, Davis KB. Analysis of randomized and non-randomized patients in clinical trials using the comprehensive cohort follow-up study design. Controlled Clin Trials 1992;13:226–239.
Olschewski M, Scheurlen H. Comprehensive cohort study: an alternative to randomized consent design in a breast preservation trial. Methods Inf Med 1985;24:131–134.
MacLehose RR, Reeves BC, Harvey IM, et al. A systematic review of comparisons of effect sizes derived from randomized and non-randomized studies. Health Technol Assess 2000;4:34.
Britton A, McKee M, Black N, et al. Choosing between randomized and non-randomized studies: a systematic review. Health Technol Assessment 1998;2:13.
Benson K, Hartz AJ. A Comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med 2000;342:1878–1886.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Humana Press Inc., Totowa NJ
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Axelrod, D.A., Hayward, R. (2006). Nonrandomized Interventional Study Designs (Quasi-Experimental Designs). In: Penson, D.F., Wei, J.T. (eds) Clinical Research Methods for Surgeons. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-230-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-230-4_4
Publisher Name: Humana Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-326-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-59745-230-4
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)