Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Evidence Based Orthopaedics- The Best Practice Standards

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Evidence Based Orthopaedics- The Best Practice Standards"— Presentation transcript:

1 Evidence Based Orthopaedics- The Best Practice Standards
Dr Hitesh Gopalan U Editor, Evidence Based Orthopaedic Principles Editor, Visiting Professor, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada Expert Advisor, OrthoEvidence SICOT India Scientific Chairman

2 Disclosures Nil

3 10 pathbreaking discoveries in last 500 years

4 Why EBM? One of the most highly searched medical word on Google
Change in existing Practice

5 Hierarchy of Evidence Randomized Trials Prospective Cohort Studies
Meta-analysis Randomized Trials Level 1 Prospective Cohort Studies Level 2 Level 3 Case Control Studies Retrospective Case Series Level 4 Opinion Level 5

6 Randomization Tx A Outcome R Patients Tx B Outcome Forward in Time

7 Randomized Trials Aren’t Always Practical or Feasible
Ethical Issues “Is it ethical to randomize patients” Outcomes are too rare? “We’ll never be able to recruit so many patients!” Surgeon “buy in” Differential expertise The Primary Question Prognosis Cost We’ll never raise enough money to pull this off

8 Hierarchy of Evidence Randomized Trials Prospective Cohort Studies
Level 1 Prospective Cohort Studies Level 2 Level 3 Case Control Studies Retrospective Case Series Level 4 Opinion Level 5

9 Cohort Study ? Forward in Time Exposed A Outcome Patients Exposed B

10 Hierarchy of Evidence Randomized Trials Prospective Cohort Studies
Level 1 Prospective Cohort Studies Level 2 Level 3 Case Control Studies Retrospective Case Series Level 4 Opinion Level 5

11 Case-Control Study Backward in Time Infection Prognostic Factor
Outcomes Infection Prognostic Factor Start Here No Infection Prognostic Factor Backward in Time

12 What is Evidence-based Medicine?
conscientious requires clinical expertise current best evidence implies hierarchy of evidence health care decisions patient values

13 Hierarchy of Evidence Randomized Trials Prospective Cohort Studies
Case Control Studies Retrospective Case Series Opinion

14 Hierarchy of Evidence Randomized Trials Prospective Cohort Studies
Meta-analysis Randomized Trials Less Bias Level 1 Prospective Cohort Studies Level 2 Level 3 Case Control Studies Retrospective Case Series Level 4 Opinion Level 5 More Bias

15 Average No of Publications
6400 Across 64 pubmed Index Orthopaedic Journals

16 Countless Articles and Books
Springer: 150 Orthopaedic books per year Thieme: another 50….

17 Big Data

18 Industry Funded Research
Drug trials

19 VTE Prophylaxis ACCP Vs AAOS Debates: last 10 years
LMWH, Dabigatran, Fondaparinux, Rivaroxaban, Apixaban Recent Addition: Aspirin + Mechanical Prophylaxis

20 Evidence Pyramid

21 AVN Femoral head

22 GRADE Recommendations
High = Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect Moderate = Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate

23 High = Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect
Moderate = Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate

24 GRADE Recommendations
Low = Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490.

25 AVN Hip Low = Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate

26 Downgrade Serious (-1) or very serious (-2) limitation to study quality Important inconsistency (-1) Some(-1) or major (-2) uncertainty about directness Imprecise or sparse data (-1) High probability of reporting bias

27 Levels of Evidence-2003

28

29

30 EBM: Who Discovered? Gordon Guyatt David Sackett( )

31 Navigated TKR Vs Conventional

32 Navigation 1mm deviation from mechanical axis
Femoral and tibial component alignment as perfect as possible Cost Effectiveness??

33 Eminence Vs Evidence: Hi Flex
38% femoral component loosening Han HS, J Bone Joint Surg Br Nov;89(11):

34

35 Clavicle Trial Explosion in clavicle fracture ORIF
Extended indications

36 Thank You


Download ppt "Evidence Based Orthopaedics- The Best Practice Standards"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google