Literature DB >> 14662277

Limiting loss to follow-up in a multicenter randomized trial in orthopedic surgery.

Sheila Sprague1, Pamela Leece, Mohit Bhandari, Paul Tornetta, Emil Schemitsch, Marc F Swiontkowski.   

Abstract

Even the best-designed, randomized controlled trials suffer when patients are lost to follow-up. Incomplete follow-up biases the results of a trial when patients who drop out are different from those who complete follow-up. This is exaggerated further when there are differential dropout rates between study groups. Previous randomized controlled trials in orthopedic trauma have reported up to 28% loss to follow-up. Only by striving to achieve a 0% loss to follow-up rate can we be certain that this type of bias does not affect our results. In our ongoing multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing reamed and nonreamed intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures, we have implemented several innovative strategies to minimize loss to follow-up. The exclusion criteria and consent process are designed to minimize losses. Study staff are carefully trained in communication and negotiation with patients. Additionally, a central methods center monitors all patient follow-up and aids in finding lost patients. Through these primary, secondary, and tertiary interventions, we have achieved 94% complete 1-year follow-up for the first 440 patients enrolled in the trial. Eleven patients withdrew consent, and we are unable to locate 17 patients. We have successfully minimized the loss to follow-up rate in our trial by incorporating innovative prevention and retention strategies into its design and conduct. Through planning, organization, and committing time and resources to minimizing loss to follow-up, other orthopedic trauma trials can hope to achieve the same high rates of follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14662277     DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2003.08.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Control Clin Trials        ISSN: 0197-2456


  32 in total

1.  Practical tips for surgical research: how to optimize patient recruitment.

Authors:  Achilleas Thoma; Forough Farrokhyar; Leslie McKnight; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.089

2.  Why perform a priori sample size calculation?

Authors:  Forough Farrokhyar; Deven Reddy; Rudolf W Poolman; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Factors associated with survey response in hand surgery research.

Authors:  Arjan G J Bot; Jade A Anderson; Valentin Neuhaus; David Ring
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Predictors of missed research appointments in a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  Stéphanie J E Becker; Thierry G Guitton; David Ring
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2014-09-15

5.  The (in)stability of 21st century orthopedic patient contact information and its implications on clinical research: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Daniel A London; Jeffrey G Stepan; Charles A Goldfarb; Martin I Boyer; Ryan P Calfee
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Antihypertensive treatment of acute cerebral hemorrhage.

Authors: 
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 7.598

7.  The hierarchy of evidence: Levels and grades of recommendation.

Authors:  Ba Petrisor; M Bhandari
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.251

8.  Differential losses to follow-up that are outcome-dependent can vitiate a clinical trial: Simulation results.

Authors:  Richard F Potthoff
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2017-10-30       Impact factor: 1.051

9.  Randomized trial of reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures.

Authors:  Mohit Bhandari; Gordon Guyatt; Paul Tornetta; Emil H Schemitsch; Marc Swiontkowski; David Sanders; Stephen D Walter
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 10.  Loss to follow-up in orthopaedic clinical trials: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jeremy S Somerson; Katherine C Bartush; Jeffrey B Shroff; Mohit Bhandari; Boris A Zelle
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.