Searching for and use of conference abstracts in health technology assessments: Policy and practice

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yenal Dundar ◽  
Susanna Dodd ◽  
Paula Williamson ◽  
Tom Walley ◽  
Rumona Dickson
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Excellence ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Current Policy ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Additional Time ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Abstract Data ◽  
Abstract Presentation

Objectives:Current policy and practice regarding identification of and extent of use of data from conference abstracts in health technology assessment reviews (TARs) are examined.Methods:The methods used were (i) survey of TAR groups to identify general policy and experience related to use of abstract data, and (ii) audit of TARs commissioned by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and published between January 2000 and October 2004.Results:Five of seven TAR groups reported a general policy that included searching for and including studies available as conference abstracts and presentations. A total of sixty-three published HTA reports for NICE were identified. Of these reports, thirty-eight identified at least one randomized controlled trial available as an abstract/presentation. Twenty-six (68 percent) of these thirty-eight TARs included studies available as abstracts.Conclusions:There are variations in policy and practice across TAR groups regarding the searching for and inclusion of studies available as conference abstracts. There is a need for clarity and transparency for review teams regarding how abstract data are managed. If conference abstracts are to be included, reviewers need to allocate additional time for searching and managing data from these sources. Review teams should also be encouraged to state explicitly their search strategies for identifying conference abstracts, their methods for assessing these abstracts for inclusion and, where appropriate, how the data were used and their effect on the results.

The Alberta hip and knee replacement project: A model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of clinical pathways

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 113-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine L. Gooch ◽  
Douglas Smith ◽  
Tracy Wasylak ◽  
Peter D. Faris ◽  
Deborah A. Marshall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Knee Replacement ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Clinical Pathways ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Background:The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project developed a new evidence-based clinical pathway (NCP) for total hip (THR) and knee (TKR) replacement. The aim was to facilitate the delivery of services in a timely and cost-effective manner while achieving the highest quality of care for the patient across the full continuum of care from patient referral to an orthopedic surgeon through surgery, recovery, and rehabilitation. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the study design, rationale, and execution of this project as a model for health technology assessment based on comparative effectiveness of alternative clinical pathways.Methods:A pragmatic randomized controlled trial study design was used to evaluate the NCP compared with the standard of care (SOC) for these procedures. The pragmatic study design was selected as a rigorous approach to produce high quality evidence suitable for informing decisions between relevant interventions in real clinical practice. The NCP was evaluated in three of the nine regional health authorities (RHAs) in Alberta with dedicated central intake clinics offering multidisciplinary care teams, constituting 80 percent of THR and TKR surgeries performed annually in Alberta. Patients were identified in the offices of twenty orthopedic surgeons who routinely performed THR or TKR surgeries. Evaluation outcome measures were based on the six dimensions of the Alberta Quality Matrix for Health (AQMH): acceptability, accessibility, appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency and safety. Data were collected prospectively through patient self-completed questionnaires at baseline and 3 and 12 months after surgery, ambulatory and inpatient chart reviews, and electronic administrative data.Results:The trial design was successful in establishing similar groups for rigorous evaluation. Of the 4,985 patients invited to participate, 69 percent of patients consented. A total of 3,434 patients were randomized: 1,712 to SOC and 1,722 to the NCP. The baseline characteristics of patients in the two study arms, including demographics, comorbidity as measured by CDS and exposure to pain medications, and health-related quality of life, as measured by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Short Form-36, were similar.Conclusions:The Alberta Hip and Knee Replacement Project demonstrates the feasibility and advantages of applying a pragmatic randomized controlled trial to ascertain comparative effectiveness. This is a model for health technology assessment that incorporates how clinical pathways can be effectively evaluated.

OP21 Involving Clinical Experts In Prioritizing Topics For Health Technology Assessment: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
Andrew Cook ◽  
Elke Streit ◽  
Gill Davage
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Usual Practice ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Difference

INTRODUCTION:The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) Programme commissions research to inform health services in the United Kingdom. The program prioritises research ideas from literature, guidelines, patients, and clinicians, to decide which research should be funded. We get clinical input on these ideas through (i) committees of clinicians and patients and (ii) seeking written advice from multiple clinicians — a refereeing process. Chairs of our committees suggested that the material we sent to clinicians was too extensive and the method of response too burdensome. We set out to determine whether reducing the information provided or burden of response would improve the engagement of clinicians with our processes, and hence improve the quality of advice provided, and the research available to health services.METHODS:We undertook a factorial randomized controlled trial (University of Southampton Faculty of Medicine Ethics Committee #8192, Trial registration: ACTRN12614000167662). Each participant was randomized to receive one of two types of material to comment on, and one of two means to respond. In the first allocation participants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio between receiving a ‘vignette’ (a briefing paper of up to ten pages discussing possible research = usual practice), or a ‘commissioning brief’ (a single page summarising the proposed research). In the second allocation, the method of response was randomized, between a structured form and free text email.RESULTS:We randomized 460 clinical experts, and 356 (77.4 percent) responded. The responses were graded for quality on a scale of 0 to 4 (higher scores better). Non-response was scored as 0. Analysis using ANOVA gave results of a structured response scoring .34 points (Standard Deviation, SD .36) over a freeform response (p = .02); and the commissioning brief as .04 points over a vignette (p = .81).CONCLUSIONS:This was the first randomized trial to take place inside the secretariat of the HTA program. The difference in quality score between the brief and the vignette allocations was neither statistically nor practically important. The difference between the structured and freeform response was statistically significant, and sufficiently large to be important in practice. While the choice of material to share with clinicians seems unimportant we have shown that it is worth sending a structured response form to experts.

scholarly journals Randomized Controlled Trial of an Intervention to Improve Nurses’ Hazardous Drug Handling

2019 ◽  
pp. 248-256 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Drug Exposure ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
The United States ◽  
Perceived Barriers ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Ambulatory Oncology ◽  
Drug Handling

Objectives: To evaluate whether a web-based educational intervention improved personal protective equipment (PPE) use among oncology nurses who handle hazardous drugs. Sample & Setting: From 2015 to 2017, the authors partnered with 12 ambulatory oncology settings in the United States to enroll 396 nurses, 257 of whom completed baseline and primary endpoint surveys. Methods & Variables: In a cluster randomized controlled trial, 136 nurses in control settings received a one-hour educational module on PPE use with quarterly reminders, and 121 nurses in treatment settings received the control intervention plus tailored messages to address perceived barriers and quarterly data gathered on hazardous drug spills across all study settings. The primary outcome was nurse-reported PPE use. Results: Control and intervention sites had suboptimal PPE use before and after the intervention. No significant differences were observed in PPE use knowledge or perceived barriers. Participants reported high satisfaction with the study experience. Implications for Nursing: Hazardous drug exposure confers notable health risks to healthcare workers. To improve hazardous drug handling, occupational healthcare workers, health systems, and professional organizations should consider coordinated efforts to implement policy and practice changes.

A technology-enhanced weight-loss program in multiple-cat households: a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1098612X2110444
Author(s):  
Barr N Hadar ◽  
Kenneth J Lambrecht ◽  
Zvonimir Poljak ◽  
Jason B Coe ◽  
Elizabeth A Stone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weight Loss ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Dietary Restriction ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Weight Loss Program ◽  
Traditional Group ◽  
Activity Monitors ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Technology Group

Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine whether a technology-enhanced weight-loss program, using a home pet health technology ecosystem, is an effective tool in feline weight-loss management in multiple-cat households and to evaluate its impact on cat behavior. Methods The study was a prospective parallel unmasked block-randomized controlled trial comparing two weight loss intervention groups: (1) traditional group with dietary restriction alone (n = 9); (2) technology group that used dietary restriction, digital scales, smart feeders, activity monitors and pet treat cameras (n = 6). A 12-week weight-loss program of client-owned indoor-only two- or three-cat households with at least one overweight cat was conducted in Canada and the USA. Owner impressions of the technology, weight loss rates, smart feeder data, activity monitor data and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed. Results The study was completed by 9/15 traditional group and 6/10 technology group cats. Dropouts were mainly due to owner issues unrelated to the study. The pet health technology ecosystem received favorable reviews (six responders). Smart feeders and home scales were perceived as valuable additions, while activity monitors and pet treat cameras were valued lower. The average weekly weight-loss rate (percent loss of initial body weight) was higher ( P = 0.036) in the technology group (0.694%) than in the traditional group (0.175%). Although not associated with weight-loss rates, technology group cats trended toward grazing feeding patterns and decreased daily activity counts, while HRQoL increased, on average, for all cats. Conclusions and relevance This introductory investigation suggests that a technology-enhanced weight-loss program would be accepted by cat owners and may deliver advantageous outcomes in multiple-cat households, providing an effective and practical tool in feline weight-loss strategies that will continue to evolve as new technologies become available. It also illustrates the potential value of data gathered from home monitoring devices and digital diaries, providing deeper insights into pet behavior.

scholarly journals A Novel User Utility Score for Diabetes Management Using Digital Health Technology: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Tailored Mobile Coaching System (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheol-Young Park ◽  
Min-Kyung Lee ◽  
Da Young Lee ◽  
Hong-Yup Ahn
Keyword(s):  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Engagement ◽  
Utility Score ◽  
Diabetes Management ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Randomized Controlled

BACKGROUND Digital health technology has been developed to support diabetes self-management, but its effectiveness could depend on patient engagement. OBJECTIVE We examined the relationship between novel user utility score (UUS) developed to measure patient engagement and glycemic control among a policyholders with type 2 diabetes. METHODS In 72 participants, we analyzed the association of health outcomes over 12 months with UUS for the first 3 months through a sub-analysis of results from a 12-month randomized controlled trial of a tailored mobile coaching (TMC) system. The UUS was calculated as the sum of scores for four major core components (range 0–8): frequency of self-monitoring blood glucose testing, dietary and exercise records, and message reading rate. RESULTS Participants were divided into two groups: UUS:0–4 (n = 38) and UUS:5–8 (n = 34). Change from baseline in HbA1c was greater with the UUS:5–8 group than the UUS:0–4 group at 3 months (-1.0% vs. -0.37%; P = 0.018), and was sustained through 6 (-0.99 vs. -0.32; P = 0.013) and 12 months (-0.92 vs. -0.33; P = 0.049). Significant differences in changes in HbA1c between the groups were observed over the 12-month period (P for trend < 0.0001). Changes in HbA1c at 3, 6 and 12 months were significantly associated with UUS. CONCLUSIONS UUS as a measure of patient engagement was associated with changes in HbA1c and could be used to predict improved glycemic control in diabetes management using a TMC system in type 2 diabetes. CLINICALTRIAL NCT03033407

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document