In reply

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterOther

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

IN REPLY: We thank Adams for providing private health insurance data that confirm the continued use of arthroscopic surgery for patients with osteoarthritis. We agree that the patient?s view of the benefits of the procedure is fundamental to assessing treatment success. We do not doubt that many patients are happy with the results of arthroscopic knee surgery, but this does not necessarily imply that the surgery has had any specific effect, as satisfaction rates are high after many ineffective placebo treatments. Indeed, high-quality randomised controlled trials have consistently failed to demonstrate clinically relevant self-assessed benefits of arthroscopy compared with sham surgery1 or non-surgical comparators.2-4 Potential risks of arthroscopy are also an important consideration. These include thrombosis, infection, complications of anaesthesia, and increased progression of osteoarthritis and likelihood of joint replacement.5 Satisfaction surveys do not justify the ongoing use of ineffective interventions. While some may find it acceptable to fund care based on perceived effectiveness, in this instance to do so might be doing more harm than good.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)100 - 100
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Journal of Australia
Volume199
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Jul 2013

Cite this

Buchbinder, Rachelle ; Harris, Ian. / In reply. In: Medical Journal of Australia. 2013 ; Vol. 199, No. 2. pp. 100 - 100.
@article{785912b67ef94c889ed74ace88ae14f8,
title = "In reply",
abstract = "IN REPLY: We thank Adams for providing private health insurance data that confirm the continued use of arthroscopic surgery for patients with osteoarthritis. We agree that the patient?s view of the benefits of the procedure is fundamental to assessing treatment success. We do not doubt that many patients are happy with the results of arthroscopic knee surgery, but this does not necessarily imply that the surgery has had any specific effect, as satisfaction rates are high after many ineffective placebo treatments. Indeed, high-quality randomised controlled trials have consistently failed to demonstrate clinically relevant self-assessed benefits of arthroscopy compared with sham surgery1 or non-surgical comparators.2-4 Potential risks of arthroscopy are also an important consideration. These include thrombosis, infection, complications of anaesthesia, and increased progression of osteoarthritis and likelihood of joint replacement.5 Satisfaction surveys do not justify the ongoing use of ineffective interventions. While some may find it acceptable to fund care based on perceived effectiveness, in this instance to do so might be doing more harm than good.",
author = "Rachelle Buchbinder and Ian Harris",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "22",
doi = "10.5694/mja13.10372",
language = "English",
volume = "199",
pages = "100 -- 100",
journal = "Medical Journal of Australia",
issn = "0025-729X",
publisher = "AMPCo",
number = "2",

}

Buchbinder, R & Harris, I 2013, 'In reply', Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 199, no. 2, pp. 100 - 100. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja13.10372

In reply. / Buchbinder, Rachelle; Harris, Ian.

In: Medical Journal of Australia, Vol. 199, No. 2, 22.07.2013, p. 100 - 100.

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterOther

TY - JOUR

T1 - In reply

AU - Buchbinder, Rachelle

AU - Harris, Ian

PY - 2013/7/22

Y1 - 2013/7/22

N2 - IN REPLY: We thank Adams for providing private health insurance data that confirm the continued use of arthroscopic surgery for patients with osteoarthritis. We agree that the patient?s view of the benefits of the procedure is fundamental to assessing treatment success. We do not doubt that many patients are happy with the results of arthroscopic knee surgery, but this does not necessarily imply that the surgery has had any specific effect, as satisfaction rates are high after many ineffective placebo treatments. Indeed, high-quality randomised controlled trials have consistently failed to demonstrate clinically relevant self-assessed benefits of arthroscopy compared with sham surgery1 or non-surgical comparators.2-4 Potential risks of arthroscopy are also an important consideration. These include thrombosis, infection, complications of anaesthesia, and increased progression of osteoarthritis and likelihood of joint replacement.5 Satisfaction surveys do not justify the ongoing use of ineffective interventions. While some may find it acceptable to fund care based on perceived effectiveness, in this instance to do so might be doing more harm than good.

AB - IN REPLY: We thank Adams for providing private health insurance data that confirm the continued use of arthroscopic surgery for patients with osteoarthritis. We agree that the patient?s view of the benefits of the procedure is fundamental to assessing treatment success. We do not doubt that many patients are happy with the results of arthroscopic knee surgery, but this does not necessarily imply that the surgery has had any specific effect, as satisfaction rates are high after many ineffective placebo treatments. Indeed, high-quality randomised controlled trials have consistently failed to demonstrate clinically relevant self-assessed benefits of arthroscopy compared with sham surgery1 or non-surgical comparators.2-4 Potential risks of arthroscopy are also an important consideration. These include thrombosis, infection, complications of anaesthesia, and increased progression of osteoarthritis and likelihood of joint replacement.5 Satisfaction surveys do not justify the ongoing use of ineffective interventions. While some may find it acceptable to fund care based on perceived effectiveness, in this instance to do so might be doing more harm than good.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880687929&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5694/mja13.10372

DO - 10.5694/mja13.10372

M3 - Letter

VL - 199

SP - 100

EP - 100

JO - Medical Journal of Australia

JF - Medical Journal of Australia

SN - 0025-729X

IS - 2

ER -