Background:
Management of endometriosis should be based on the best available evidence.
The pyramid of evidence reflects unbiased observations analysed with traditional statistics.
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the clinical interpretation of these data by experts.
Unfortunately, traditional statistical inference can refute but cannot confirm a hypothesis and clinical experience is considered a personal opinion.
Objectives:
A proof of concept to document clinical experience by considering each diagnosis and treatment as an experiment with an outcome, which is used to update subsequent management.
Materials and methods:
Experience and knowledge-based questions were answered on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) by surgery-oriented clinicians with experience of > 50 surgeries for endometriosis.
Results:
The answers reflect the collective clinical experience of managing >10.000 women with endometriosis.
Experience-based management was overall comparable as approved by >75% of answers rated ≥ 8/10 VAS. Knowledge-based management was more variable, reflecting debated issues and differences between experts and non-experts.
Conclusions:
The collective experience-based management of those with endometriosis is similar for surgery-oriented clinicians.
Results do not conflict with EBM and are a Bayesian prior, to be confirmed, refuted or updated by further observations.
What is new?
Collective experience-based management can be measured and is more than a personal opinion.
This might extend EBM trial results to the entire population and add data difficult to obtain in RCTs, such as many aspects of surgery.
Management of endometriosis should be based on the best available evidence.
The pyramid of evidence reflects unbiased observations analysed with traditional statistics.
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is the clinical interpretation of these data by experts.
Unfortunately, traditional statistical inference can refute but cannot confirm a hypothesis and clinical experience is considered a personal opinion.
Objectives:
A proof of concept to document clinical experience by considering each diagnosis and treatment as an experiment with an outcome, which is used to update subsequent management.
Materials and methods:
Experience and knowledge-based questions were answered on a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) by surgery-oriented clinicians with experience of > 50 surgeries for endometriosis.
Results:
The answers reflect the collective clinical experience of managing >10.000 women with endometriosis.
Experience-based management was overall comparable as approved by >75% of answers rated ≥ 8/10 VAS. Knowledge-based management was more variable, reflecting debated issues and differences between experts and non-experts.
Conclusions:
The collective experience-based management of those with endometriosis is similar for surgery-oriented clinicians.
Results do not conflict with EBM and are a Bayesian prior, to be confirmed, refuted or updated by further observations.
What is new?
Collective experience-based management can be measured and is more than a personal opinion.
This might extend EBM trial results to the entire population and add data difficult to obtain in RCTs, such as many aspects of surgery.