Cargando…
Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol
INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10277111/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37295832 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068255 |
_version_ | 1785060220366487552 |
---|---|
author | Griffin, James Davis, Edward T Parsons, Helen Gemperle Mannion, Elke Khatri, Chetan Ellard, David R Blyth, Mark J Clement, Nicholas David Deehan, David Flynn, Nicholas Fox, Josephine Grant, Nicholas J Haddad, Fares S Hutchinson, Charles E Mason, James Mohindru, Bishal Scott, Chloe E H Smith, Toby O Skinner, John A Toms, Andrew D Rees, Sophie Underwood, Martin Metcalfe, Andrew |
author_facet | Griffin, James Davis, Edward T Parsons, Helen Gemperle Mannion, Elke Khatri, Chetan Ellard, David R Blyth, Mark J Clement, Nicholas David Deehan, David Flynn, Nicholas Fox, Josephine Grant, Nicholas J Haddad, Fares S Hutchinson, Charles E Mason, James Mohindru, Bishal Scott, Chloe E H Smith, Toby O Skinner, John A Toms, Andrew D Rees, Sophie Underwood, Martin Metcalfe, Andrew |
author_sort | Griffin, James |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accuracy and could contribute to reduced pain, improved function and lower overall cost of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. However, TKR with conventional instruments may be just as effective and may be quicker and cheaper. There is a need for a robust evaluation of this technology, including cost-effectiveness analyses using both within-trial and modelling approaches. This trial will compare robotic-assisted against conventional TKR to provide high-quality evidence on whether robotic-assisted knee replacement is beneficial to patients and cost-effective for healthcare systems. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial-Knee is a multicentre, participant-assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKR compared with TKR using conventional instruments. A total of 332 participants will be randomised (1:1) to provide 90% power for a 12-point difference in the primary outcome measure; the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months postrandomisation. Allocation concealment will be achieved using computer-based randomisation performed on the day of surgery and methods for blinding will include sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will be reported in line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. A parallel study will collect data on the learning effects associated with robotic-arm systems. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by an ethics committee for patient participation (East Midlands—Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, 29 July 2020. NRES number: 20/EM/0159). All results from the study will be disseminated using peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, lay summaries and social media as appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27624068. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10277111 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102771112023-06-19 Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol Griffin, James Davis, Edward T Parsons, Helen Gemperle Mannion, Elke Khatri, Chetan Ellard, David R Blyth, Mark J Clement, Nicholas David Deehan, David Flynn, Nicholas Fox, Josephine Grant, Nicholas J Haddad, Fares S Hutchinson, Charles E Mason, James Mohindru, Bishal Scott, Chloe E H Smith, Toby O Skinner, John A Toms, Andrew D Rees, Sophie Underwood, Martin Metcalfe, Andrew BMJ Open Surgery INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted knee replacement systems have been introduced to healthcare services worldwide in an effort to improve clinical outcomes for people, although high-quality evidence that they are clinically, or cost-effective remains sparse. Robotic-arm systems may improve surgical accuracy and could contribute to reduced pain, improved function and lower overall cost of total knee replacement (TKR) surgery. However, TKR with conventional instruments may be just as effective and may be quicker and cheaper. There is a need for a robust evaluation of this technology, including cost-effectiveness analyses using both within-trial and modelling approaches. This trial will compare robotic-assisted against conventional TKR to provide high-quality evidence on whether robotic-assisted knee replacement is beneficial to patients and cost-effective for healthcare systems. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial-Knee is a multicentre, participant-assessor blinded, randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted TKR compared with TKR using conventional instruments. A total of 332 participants will be randomised (1:1) to provide 90% power for a 12-point difference in the primary outcome measure; the Forgotten Joint Score at 12 months postrandomisation. Allocation concealment will be achieved using computer-based randomisation performed on the day of surgery and methods for blinding will include sham incisions for marker clusters and blinded operation notes. The primary analysis will adhere to the intention-to-treat principle. Results will be reported in line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. A parallel study will collect data on the learning effects associated with robotic-arm systems. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been approved by an ethics committee for patient participation (East Midlands—Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee, 29 July 2020. NRES number: 20/EM/0159). All results from the study will be disseminated using peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, lay summaries and social media as appropriate. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27624068. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10277111/ /pubmed/37295832 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068255 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Surgery Griffin, James Davis, Edward T Parsons, Helen Gemperle Mannion, Elke Khatri, Chetan Ellard, David R Blyth, Mark J Clement, Nicholas David Deehan, David Flynn, Nicholas Fox, Josephine Grant, Nicholas J Haddad, Fares S Hutchinson, Charles E Mason, James Mohindru, Bishal Scott, Chloe E H Smith, Toby O Skinner, John A Toms, Andrew D Rees, Sophie Underwood, Martin Metcalfe, Andrew Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol |
title | Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol |
title_full | Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol |
title_fullStr | Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol |
title_full_unstemmed | Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol |
title_short | Robotic Arthroplasty Clinical and cost Effectiveness Randomised controlled trial (RACER-knee): a study protocol |
title_sort | robotic arthroplasty clinical and cost effectiveness randomised controlled trial (racer-knee): a study protocol |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10277111/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37295832 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-068255 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT griffinjames roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT davisedwardt roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT parsonshelen roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT gemperlemannionelke roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT khatrichetan roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT ellarddavidr roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT blythmarkj roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT clementnicholasdavid roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT deehandavid roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT flynnnicholas roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT foxjosephine roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT grantnicholasj roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT haddadfaress roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT hutchinsoncharlese roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT masonjames roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT mohindrubishal roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT scottchloeeh roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT smithtobyo roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT skinnerjohna roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT tomsandrewd roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT reessophie roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT underwoodmartin roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol AT metcalfeandrew roboticarthroplastyclinicalandcosteffectivenessrandomisedcontrolledtrialracerkneeastudyprotocol |