Literature DB >> 17076870

Integrating the patient's perspective into device evaluation trials.

Nancy Kline Leidy1, Kathleen Beusterien, Erin Sullivan, Randel Richner, Neal I Muni.   

Abstract

Innovations in medical device technology have greatly expanded the range of therapeutic options available to physicians and their patients. The understanding of treatment effects from the patient's perspective is an essential component of a comprehensive assessment of any new therapy, including medical devices. The term "patient-reported outcomes" (PROs) has been growing in use to refer to a cluster of variables such as health-related quality of life, symptoms, physical functioning, psychological well-being, treatment satisfaction, and treatment preferences. As in drug trials, the use of PROs in device evaluation has several methodological challenges, ranging from general concerns about interpretation, to more specific issues related to study design and regulatory approval (use of PROs as primary end points, incorporation in labeling, and product promotion). Successful approaches for integrating PROs into device evaluation trials include the careful selection of appropriate, interpretable PRO end points, accounting for possible confounding factors, and the use of alternatives to placebo-controlled trial designs, such as single-arm pre-post, observational, and registry studies, when the use of placebo control groups is not feasible. This article discusses the potential value and difficulties in measuring PROs in device studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17076870     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00132.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  4 in total

1.  Development and validation of participation and positive psychologic function measures for stroke survivors.

Authors:  Rita K Bode; Allen W Heinemann; Zeeshan Butt; Jena Stallings; Caitlin Taylor; Morgan Rowe; Elliot J Roth
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 2.  A review of quality of life instruments used in liver transplantation.

Authors:  Colleen L Jay; Zeeshan Butt; Daniela P Ladner; Anton I Skaro; Michael M Abecassis
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 25.083

3.  Cost minimization analysis of different growth hormone pen devices based on time-and-motion simulations.

Authors:  Nancy A Nickman; Sandra W Haak; Jaewhan Kim
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2010-04-08

4.  The health effects of a forest environment on subclinical cardiovascular disease and heath-related quality of life.

Authors:  Tsung-Ming Tsao; Ming-Jer Tsai; Ya-Nan Wang; Heng-Lun Lin; Chang-Fu Wu; Jing-Shiang Hwang; Sandy-H J Hsu; Hsing Chao; Kai-Jen Chuang; Charles-C K Chou; Ta-Chen Su
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-07-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.