ABSTRACT
Background & objectives: Due to lack of appropriate statistical knowledge, published research articles contain various errors related to the design, analysis and interpretation of results in the area of biomedical research. If research contains statistical error, however, costly, it may be of no use and the purpose of the investigation gets defeated. Many biomedical research articles published in different peer reviewed journals may retain several statistical errors and flaws in them. This study aimed to examine the trend and status of application of statistics in biomedical research articles. Study design, sample size estimation and statistical measures are crucial components of a study. These points were evaluated in published original research articles to understand the use or misuse of statistical tools. Methods: Three hundred original research articles from the latest issues of selected 37 journals were reviewed. These journals were from the five internationally recognized publication groups (CLINICAL KEY, BMJ Group, WILEY, CAMBRIDGE and OXFORD) accessible through the online library of SGPGI, Lucknow, India. Results: Among articles assessed under present investigation, 85.3 per cent (n=256) were observational, and 14.7 per cent (n=44) were interventional studies. In 93 per cent (n=279) of research articles, sample size estimation was not reproducible. The simple random sampling was encountered rarely in biomedical studies even though none of the articles was adjusted by design effect and, only five articles had used randomized test. The testing of assumption of normality was mentioned in only four studies before applying parametric tests. Interpretation & conclusions: In order to present biomedical research results with reliable and precise estimates based on data, the role of engaging statistical experts need to be appreciated. Journals must have standard rules for reporting study design, sample size and data analysis tools. Careful attention is needed while applying any statistical procedure as, it will not only help readers to trust in the published articles, but also rely on the inferences the published articles draw.
Subject(s)
Biomedical Research , Research Design , Humans , Data Collection , IndiaABSTRACT
Background and Aims: Ultrasound-guided transversalis fascia plane block (USG-guided TFPB) has recently been evaluated for post-caesarean acute pain management. We compared it with standard wound infiltration for both acute and chronic post-caesarean pain management. Methods: All patients undergoing caesarean section (CS) under subarachnoid block were included and randomised. Patients in group C received standard wound infiltration (20 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine) and group-T received bilateral USG-guided TFPB (20 ml of 0.375% ropivacaine) at the end of the surgery. Acute pain assessed using numeric rating scale (NRS), time to first request of analgesia and total rescue analgesic consumption in 24 hours. The incidence of chronic persistent post-surgical pain (CPSP), neuropathic pain component and quality of life (QoL) were assessed. Fisher's exact test, Chi-square test, unpaired Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U test were used. Results: Sixty patients were included with 30 in each group. NRS score on rest at 6th and 24th hour and on active movement at 1st hour was significantly decreased in group T. The "time to first request of analgesia" was statistically higher in group T, that is, 10.77 ± 1.39 h versus 6.30 ± 1.60 h. Five (16.6%) and two (6.6%) patients in groups C and T, respectively, required rescue analgesia in first 24 hours. 30% (n = 6) and 10% (n = 2) patients in groups C and T, respectively, developed CPSP. The neuropathic pain component was significantly reduced and QoL was significantly improved in group T. Conclusion: TFPB is efficacious for management of both acute and chronic post-caesarean pain management.
