Literature DB >> 11074392

Using routine data to complement and enhance the results of randomised controlled trials.

J D Lewsey1, A H Leyland, G D Murray, F A Boddy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely accepted as the best way to assess the outcomes and safety of medical interventions, but are sometimes not ethical, not feasible, or limited in the generalisability of their results. In such circumstances, routinely available data could help in several ways. Routine data could be used, for example, to conduct 'pseudo-trials', to estimate likely outcomes and required sample size to help design and conduct trials, or to examine whether the expected outcomes observed in an RCT will be realised in the general population.
OBJECTIVES: The project was undertaken to explore how routinely assembled hospital data might complement or supplement RCTs to evaluate medical interventions: in contexts where RCTs are not feasible for defining the context and design of an RCT for assessing whether the benefits indicated by RCTs are achieved in wider clinical practice.
METHODS: The project was based on the system of linked Scottish morbidity records, which cover 100% of acute hospital care episodes and statutory death records from 1981 to 1995. Three case studies were undertaken as a way of investigating the utility of these records in different applications. First, an attempt was made to analyse the link between the timing of surgery for subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) and subsequent outcomes (a question not easily susceptible to RCT design). A subsample was derived by excluding patients for which a diagnosis of SAH may not have been established or that may not have been admitted to a neurosurgical unit, and the data were assessed to attempt to inform the design of a trial of early versus late surgery. Transurethral prostatectomy (TURP), the second case study, has become the surgery of choice for benign prostatic hyperplasia without systematic assessment of its effectiveness and safety, and an RCT would now be considered unethical. However, there is a need to investigate long-term effects and the influence of co-morbidities on outcomes. A retrospective comparison of mortality and re-operation following either open prostatectomy (OPEN) or TURP was, therefore, undertaken. Patients for whom it was not possible to establish the initial procedure were excluded. The third case study compared coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTCA) for coronary revascularisation. RCTs have been conducted in limited patient subgroups with short follow-up periods. A meta-analysis of RCTs could be augmented by routine data, which are available for large populations. This would allow assessment of subgroup effects, and outcomes over a long period. A subgroup of patients was therefore constructed for whom relevant routine data were available and who reflected the entry criteria for major RCTs, thus enabling a comparison between the results expected from this subgroup and those of the general population. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSIONS: The uses of routine data in these contexts had strengths and weaknesses. The SAH study suggested a means of assessing outcomes and survival rates following haemorrhage, which could have value in informing the design of more precise trials and in evaluating changes in outcome following the introduction of new treatments such as embolisation. However, the potential of the data was not realised because their scope and content were insufficient. For example, lack of data on the time of onset of symptoms and patients' conditions at hospital admission made it difficult to establish the link between timing of surgery and the outcome, and there was insufficient information on patients' conditions at discharge to enable a comparison of outcomes. The prostatectomy study was able to address questions not answered by RCT literature because the large number of cases it included allowed exploration of subgroup effects. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11074392

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Technol Assess        ISSN: 1366-5278            Impact factor:   4.014


  18 in total

1.  Using Linked Electronic Health Records to Estimate Healthcare Costs: Key Challenges and Opportunities.

Authors:  Miqdad Asaria; Katja Grasic; Simon Walker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Gastroenterology services in the UK. The burden of disease, and the organisation and delivery of services for gastrointestinal and liver disorders: a review of the evidence.

Authors:  J G Williams; S E Roberts; M F Ali; W Y Cheung; D R Cohen; G Demery; A Edwards; M Greer; M D Hellier; H A Hutchings; B Ip; M F Longo; I T Russell; H A Snooks; J C Williams
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  EAES recommendations on methodology of innovation management in endoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Edmund A M Neugebauer; Monika Becker; Gerhard F Buess; Alfred Cuschieri; Hans-Peter Dauben; Abe Fingerhut; Karl H Fuchs; Brigitte Habermalz; Leonid Lantsberg; Mario Morino; Stella Reiter-Theil; Gabriela Soskuty; Wolfgang Wayand; Thilo Welsch
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Efficacy and safety of dutasteride for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Luca Cindolo; Mario Alvarez-Maestro; Roberto Castellucci; Luigi Schips
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Current use of routinely collected health data to complement randomized controlled trials: a meta-epidemiological survey.

Authors:  Lars G Hemkens; Despina G Contopoulos-Ioannidis; John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2016-04-06

6.  Evaluating neurorehabilitation: lessons from routine data collection.

Authors:  J A Freeman; J C Hobart; E D Playford; B Undy; A J Thompson
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 7.  Using multiple types of studies in systematic reviews of health care interventions--a systematic review.

Authors:  Frank Peinemann; Doreen Allen Tushabe; Jos Kleijnen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Validation of the Hospital Episode Statistics Outpatient Dataset in England.

Authors:  Joanna C Thorn; Emma Turner; Luke Hounsome; Eleanor Walsh; Jenny L Donovan; Julia Verne; David E Neal; Freddie C Hamdy; Richard M Martin; Sian M Noble
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Special features of health services and register based trials - experiences from a randomized trial of childbirth classes.

Authors:  Elina Hemminki; Kaija Heikkilä; Tiina Sevón; Päivikki Koponen
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-06-11       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Completeness and diagnostic validity of recording acute myocardial infarction events in primary care, hospital care, disease registry, and national mortality records: cohort study.

Authors:  Emily Herrett; Anoop Dinesh Shah; Rachael Boggon; Spiros Denaxas; Liam Smeeth; Tjeerd van Staa; Adam Timmis; Harry Hemingway
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-05-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.