PEDIATRICS Vol. 57 No. 3 March 1976, pp. 401-407
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaikh, W.
Right arrow Articles by Feldman, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shaikh, W.
Right arrow Articles by Feldman, W.

A Systematic Review of the Literature on Evaluative Studies of Tonsillectomy and Adenoidectomy

W. Shaikh M.D., Ph.D.1, E. Vayda M.D.1, and W. Feldman M.D., F.R.C.P.(C)1

1 Departments of Pediatrics, Clinical Epidemiology, and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Although tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy (T and A) is frequently performed (indeed, it is the commonest surgical procedure done in North America1,2) considerable controversy persists regarding its effectiveness.

In 1971, 161,301 T and A's were performed in Canada at an estimated cost of close to 25.6 million dollars.3 In the United States in 1968 more than 1 million T and A's were performed.4 Assuming the cost per T and A to be similar to the costs in Canada, around $150 million were spent on this procedure in the United States in that year.

The purpose of this study is to review the English language literature pertaining to evaluation of T and A with particular emphasis on an assessment of the scientific merit of studies which have attempted to determine the efficacy of this procedure.

See Table in the PDF File

METHOD

Studies evaluating the results of T and A in the English language literature for the past 50 years5-33 were evaluated according to the following parameters: study design, sampling, completeness of description of illness and therapy, and precision of follow-up. Those studies which were most objective were awarded the highest points in each parameter. Conversely, studies which were purely descriptive or poorly documented received the fewest points.

The maximum number of points which a randomized, prospective, well-documented study could obtain was 34 points.

Table I shows the distribution of maximum scores in the various categories.

For the parameter of study design, points were awarded as shown in Table II. The highest score was given to a randomized study and the lowest to a descriptive one.

Submitted on June 16, 1975
Accepted on August 6, 1975




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eval Health ProfHome page
I. Chalmers, L. V. Hedges, and H. Cooper
A Brief History of Research Synthesis
Eval Health Prof, March 1, 2002; 25(1): 12 - 37.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 ScienceHome page
L Eisenberg
The social imperatives of medical research
Science, December 16, 1977; 198(4322): 1105 - 1110.
[PDF]