Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Second step: testing-outcome measurements.

W Lorenz1, H Troidl, J S Solomkin

  • 1Institute of Theoretical Surgery, Philipps-University of Marburg, Baldingerstrasse, 35033 Marburg, Germany.

World Journal of Surgery
|July 23, 1999
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

German Respiratory Society guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of adults suffering from acute, subacute and chronic cough.

Respiratory medicine·2020
Same author

[German Guideline for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis].

Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany)·2020
Same author

[German Guideline for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis].

Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany)·2020
Same author

[Prolonged Weaning - S2k-Guideline Published by the German Respiratory Society].

Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany)·2019
Same author

[Guidelines of the German Respiratory Society for Diagnosis and Treatment of Adults Suffering from Acute, Subacute and Chronic Cough].

Pneumologie (Stuttgart, Germany)·2019
Same author

[Erratum to: Diagnostics and treatment of primary hyperparathyroidism].

Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen·2019
Same journal

Mapping Plastic Reconstructive Surgical Needs and Access Barriers in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Scoping Review.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Correction to "Guidelines for Essential Trauma Care: Second Edition (2026)".

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Assessing the Burden of Operatively Managed Extremity Fractures in Malawi: A Tale of Two Tertiary Hospitals.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

The Impact of Obesity on Intraoperative, Oncological, and Postoperative Endpoints in Robotic Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Prediction Models for Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer: Validation of Existing Nomograms, Model Development, and Ensemble Evaluation.

World journal of surgery·2026
Same journal

Indicators for Monitoring Recovery From Surgery to Discharge Using Accelerometer in Patients With Esophageal Cancer.

World journal of surgery·2026
See all related articles

Endoscopic surgery assessment needs updated methods beyond biomedicine. New approaches incorporating clinical epidemiology, social psychology, and patient-reported outcomes are crucial for valid surgical technology evaluation.

Area of Science:

  • Surgical technology assessment
  • Clinical epidemiology
  • Health services research

Background:

  • Endoscopic surgery, despite enthusiasm, faces critical evaluation regarding its benefits and burdens.
  • Current technology assessment methodologies for surgery are outdated and require critical review.
  • Traditional surgical theory and disease concepts, dominated by biomedicine, are insufficient for modern outcome assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate the concepts and methodologies used in assessing surgical technologies, particularly endoscopic surgery.
  • To highlight the limitations of outdated biomedical approaches in measuring surgical outcomes.
  • To propose a new, comprehensive method for assessing outcomes in surgical clinical trials.

Main Methods:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Critique of current surgical theory, disease concepts, and outcome measures.
  • Integration of clinical epidemiology and social psychology into surgical assessment.
  • Development of a novel assessment framework including objective health status, patient-reported quality of life, and a true endpoint concept.

    • Main Results:

    • Existing surgical theory and disease models are inadequate for comprehensive outcome assessment.
    • Traditional outcome measures (e.g., mortality, complications, biochemical mediators) lack correlation with clinical or hermeneutic outcomes.
    • A new assessment method combining objective and subjective measures, weighted by patients and doctors, is proposed.

    Conclusions:

    • Endoscopic surgery assessment requires a paradigm shift from purely biomedical models.
    • Valid outcome measurement necessitates incorporating patient perspectives and a broader understanding of health.
    • The proposed new assessment method offers a more holistic and accurate evaluation of surgical interventions.