Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 4, 2025
Basics of Multivariate Analysis in Neuroimaging Data
Published on: July 24, 2010
Application of Bayesian Methods to Help Interpret the VANCO Trial Results
Nathan N O'Hara1, Renan C Castillo2, Anthony R Carlini2
1Department of Orthopaedics, R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Objective:
To determine whether a Bayesian analysis changes the results of the VANCO trial.
Design:
A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial using Bayesian methods.
Setting:
Thirty-six US trauma centers.
Patients:
Patients ages 18-80 years with a tibial plateau or pilon fracture deemed high risk of infection and definitively treated with plate and screw fixation.
Intervention:
Patients were randomly allocated to receive 1000 mg of intrawound vancomycin powder at their definitive fixation or to a control group that received no topical antibiotics.
Main Outcome Measurements:
A deep surgical site infection requiring operative treatment within 6 months of definitive fixation. Secondary outcomes included gram-positive and gram-negative-only deep surgical site infections.
Results:
Of the 980 patients randomized, 874 (89%) had at least 140 days of follow-up and were included in this Bayesian analysis. The estimated probability that intrawound vancomycin powder reduces the risk of a deep surgical site infection is >98% [relative risk (RR), 0.66; 95% credible interval (CrI), 0.46-0.98]. There is a >99% chance intrawound vancomycin powder reduces gram-positive infections and an 80% chance the magnitude of this risk reduction exceeds 35% (RR, 0.52; 95% CrI, 0.33-0.84) exists. It is unlikely (44%) that intrawound vancomycin powder prevents gram-negative surgical site infections (RR, 1.06; 95% CrI, 0.48-2.45).
Conclusions:
There is a high probability (>98%) that intrawound vancomycin powder reduces deep surgical site infections in patients with tibial plateau or pilon fractures at high risk of infection and even more likely it reduces deep infections with gram-positive pathogens (>99%).
Level Of Evidence:
Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Related Concept Videos
01:19Interpretation of Confidence Intervals
Confidence intervals have confidence coefficients that are crucial for their interpretation. The most common confidence coefficients are 0.90, 0.95, and 0.99, which can be written as percentages–90%, 95%, and 99%, respectively.
Suppose a person calculates a confidence interval with a confidence coefficient of 0.95. In that case, they can...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:25Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
01:29Bias in Epidemiological Studies
01:16Statistical Inference Techniques in Hypothesis Testing: Parametric Versus Nonparametric Data
Parametric statistics, as the name suggests, assumes that data follow a specific distribution, often a normal distribution. This assumption enables robust hypothesis testing and estimation. Parametric methods, like the Student's t-test or Goodness-of-fit test, are frequently employed in biostatistics due to their robustness. For instance,...
01:24Testing a Claim about Population Proportion
There are two methods of testing a claim about a population proportion: (1) Using the sample proportion from the data where a binomial distribution is approximated to the normal distribution and (2) Using the binomial probabilities calculated from the data.
The first method uses normal distribution as an approximation to the binomial distribution. The requirements are as follows: sample size is large...