Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Identifying and reporting modifications to surgical innovation: a systematic review of IDEAL/IDEAL-D studies
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Identifying and reporting modifications to surgical innovation: a systematic review of IDEAL/IDEAL-D studies
Do you wish to request the book?
Identifying and reporting modifications to surgical innovation: a systematic review of IDEAL/IDEAL-D studies
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Identifying and reporting modifications to surgical innovation: a systematic review of IDEAL/IDEAL-D studies
2025
Overview
ObjectivesThe Idea, Development, Evaluation, Assessment and Long-term follow-up (IDEAL) framework was designed to improve the quality of surgical research and evaluation of surgical innovation. It has become a widely cited tool for evaluating innovative devices and procedures, yet challenges remain concerning the definition and reporting of incremental innovative modifications, hindering evolution and evaluation of innovations and potentially risking patient safety. This systematic review examined IDEAL studies to identify such modifications and establish recent practices around modification reporting to inform the development of future guidance to facilitate safe, transparent and efficient surgical innovation.DesignSystematic review and thematic synthesis of studies reporting surgical innovation.Data sourcesWeb of Science and Scopus were searched in July 2023 using citation tools to identify studies following the IDEAL framework (citing any of 13 key IDEAL/IDEAL framework publications and guideline papers).Eligibility criteriaPrimary research studies of any design that involved invasive innovative devices or procedures.Data extraction and synthesisStudy characteristics and verbatim text for all reported modifications, including contextual information, were extracted. Data were analysed and synthesised using thematic synthesis.ResultsOf 1071 records screened, 104 studies published between 2011–2023 were included (n=87 (83.6%) study reports; n=17 (16.3%) protocols). 425 modifications were reported in 76 (73.1%) studies, including modifications to procedures (n=283, 66.6%), devices (n=94, 22.1%) and patient selection (n=48, 11.3%). Procedure/device modifications included technical, non-technical and cessation (conversion to other procedures or abandonment). Modifications were most often reported within IDEAL stage 2a (n=30/44, 68.2%), whereas there was considerable variation across other stages, such as stage 0 (n=2/3, 66%) and stage 2b (n=4/12, 33.3%).ConclusionReporting modifications is imperative for evaluating surgical innovation. However, this review found inconsistent approaches to reporting and describing modifications. Findings will inform the development of a checklist for reporting modifications that aims to complement the IDEAL framework and further promote shared learning, avoiding the repetition of harmful/ineffective modifications and enhancing patient safety.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023427704.
Publisher
British Medical Journal Publishing Group,BMJ Publishing Group LTD,BMJ Publishing Group
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.