scholarly journals Improving Power and Accuracy in Randomized Controlled Trials of Pain Treatments by Accounting for Concurrent Analgesic Use: Statistical Simulations and Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trial Data

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pradeep Suri ◽  
Patrick J Heagerty ◽  
Anna Korpak ◽  
Mark P Jensen ◽  
Laura S Gold ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Simulated Data ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Analytic Methods ◽  
Analgesic Use

The 0 to 10 numeric rating scale (NRS) of pain intensity is a standard outcome in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of pain treatments. For individuals taking analgesics, there may be a disparity between 'observed' pain intensity (the NRS, irrespective of concurrent analgesic use), and 'underlying' pain intensity (what the NRS would be had concurrent analgesics not been taken). Using a contemporary causal inference framework, we compare analytic methods that can potentially account for concurrent analgesic use, first in statistical simulations, and second in analyses of real (non-simulated) data from an RCT of lumbar epidural steroid injections (LESI). The default analytic method was ignoring analgesic use, which is the most common approach in pain RCTs. Compared to ignoring analgesic use and other analytic methods, simulations showed that a quantitative pain and analgesia composite outcome based on adding 1.5 points to observed pain intensity for those who were taking an analgesic (the QPAC1.5) optimized power and minimized bias. Analyses of real RCT data supported the results of the simulations, showing greater power with analysis of the QPAC1.5 as compared to ignoring analgesic use and most other methods examined. We propose alternative methods that should be considered in the analysis of pain RCTs.

scholarly journals Intra-articular magnesium to alleviate postoperative pain after arthroscopic knee surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lijun Shi ◽  
Haiyun Zhu ◽  
Jinhui Ma ◽  
Li-Li Shi ◽  
Fuqiang Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Opioid Consumption ◽  
Knee Surgery ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Arthroscopic Knee Surgery ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Arthroscopic Knee

Abstract Objective We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intra-articular (IA) magnesium (Mg) for postoperative pain relief after arthroscopic knee surgery. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane library, and Web of Science to identify randomized controlled trials that compared postoperative pain outcomes with or without IA Mg after knee arthroscopy. The primary outcomes were pain intensity at rest and with movement at different postoperative time points and cumulative opioid consumption within 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the time to first analgesic request and side effects. Results In total, 11 studies involving 677 participants met the eligibility criteria. Pain scores at rest and with movement 2, 4, 12, and 24 h after surgery were significantly lower, doses of supplementary opioid consumption were smaller, and the time to first analgesic requirement was longer in the IA Mg group compared with the control group. No significant difference was detected regarding adverse reactions between the groups. Conclusions Intra-articular magnesium is an effective and safe coadjuvant treatment for relieving postoperative pain intensity after arthroscopic knee surgery. Protocol registration at PROSPERO: CRD42020156403.

scholarly journals The Timing of Initiating Complementary Feeding in Preterm Infants and Its Effect on Overweight: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karin M. Vissers ◽  
Edith J.M. Feskens ◽  
Johannes B. van Goudoever ◽  
Arieke J. Janse
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Preterm Infants ◽  
Complementary Feeding ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Z Score ◽  
Term Infants ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: What is the appropriate time to start complementary feeding for preterm infants? The answer to this question is yet under debate. The timing of initiating complementary feeding may be associated with overweight in term infants. This systematic review aimed to study the effect of the timing of initiating complementary feeding on overweight in preterm infants. Predefined search items included preterm infants, complementary feeding, overweight, and their synonyms. Summary: The search identified 15,749 articles, of which 5 articles were included. Three studies presented data of randomized controlled trials and 2 studies were cohort studies. Two randomized controlled trials found no significant difference in body mass index (BMI) Z-score between the intervention groups at 12 months of age. One randomized controlled trial presented a significant greater mean rate of growth in length per week until 12 months in the preterm weaning strategy-group compared with the current best practices. One observational study concluded that each month the infants received complementary food later, the Z-score for length and weight was reduced by 0.1. Key Messages: No clear conclusion could be drawn from the included studies. This review illustrates the need for further research to access the effect of the timing of initiating complementary feeding on overweight in preterm infants.

Evaluating the reporting of adverse events in controlled clinical trials conducted in 2010–2015 on migraine drug treatments

Cephalalgia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (12) ◽  
pp. 1885-1895
Author(s):  
Peer Tfelt-Hansen ◽  
Janus Kaufmann Lindqvist ◽  
Thien Phu Do
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
International Headache Society ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Migraine Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Acute Administration ◽  
Drug Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Number Of Patients

Background In 2008, the International Headache Society published guidelines on the “evaluation and registration of adverse events in clinical drug trials on migraine”. They listed seven recommendations for reporting adverse events in randomized controlled trials on migraine. The present study aimed to evaluate adherence to these recommendations, and based on the results, to recommend improvements. Methods We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE database to identify controlled trials on migraine drugs published from 2010 to 2015. For each trial, we noted whether five of the recommended parameters were presented. In addition, we noted whether adverse events were reported in abstracts. Results We identified 73 trials; 51 studied acutely administered drugs and 22 studied prophylactic drugs for migraine. The number of patients with any adverse events were reported in 74% of acute-administration and 86% of prophylactic drug trials. Only 30 (41%) of the 73 studies reported adverse events with data in the abstracts, and 27 (37%) abstracts did not mention adverse events. Conclusion Adverse events, both frequency and symptoms, should be reported to allow a fair judgement of benefit/tolerability ratio when randomized controlled trials in migraine treatment are published. Clinically significant adverse events should be included in the abstract of every randomized controlled trial in migraine treatment.

scholarly journals Does pregabalin effectively and safely relieve postoperative pain in patients undergoing pulmonary resections?

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 555-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuangjiang Li ◽  
Wenbiao Zhang ◽  
Shan Cheng ◽  
Yongjiang Li
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Perioperative Period ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Clinical Question ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Study Type

Summary A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether pregabalin could effectively and safely reduce postoperative pain in patients undergoing pulmonary resections. Altogether 23 papers were found using the reported search, of which 6 randomized controlled trials represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Five of 6 randomized controlled trials demonstrated that the application of oral pregabalin during the perioperative period could effectively reduce postoperative pain after pulmonary resections without compromising patients’ safety. One randomized controlled trial reported no difference in the postoperative pain levels between the pregabalin group and the control group. The rates of adverse effects were generally found to be decreased in patients who received pregabalin compared to the patients who received routine analgesia, although 2 studies reported significantly higher incidences of mild drowsiness and dizziness among the pregabalin-treated patients. Currently available evidence supports that the perioperative administration of pregabalin can effectively and safely relieve postoperative pain for patients undergoing pulmonary resections.

Person-Centered Research: A novel approach to Randomized Controlled Trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 209
Author(s):  
Reza A Badian ◽  
Brendan McCormack ◽  
Vibeke Sundling
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Novel Design

Introduction: Integrating person-centered values with randomized controlled trials methodology is a novel idea. Person-centeredness is gaining steadily more prominence and attention in healthcare and health-related policy and research. Randomized controlled trials are considered as the gold standard in evidence-based medicine for evaluating the effects of treatment or determining the causal effect. A wide array of study designs is available, but there is a lack of designs with both strong person-centered principles and a strong position with respect to the level of evidence. In this paper we intend to introduce a novel design to fill such a gap.Aims and objectives: The aim of this paper is to introduce a novel study design where essential values of person-centered care (PCC) are integrated with randomized controlled trial (RCT) methodology into a novel study design termed a person-centered randomized controlled trial (PC-RCT).Methods: In this paper we discuss the importance and role of evidence in clinical research, levels of evidence, as well as the significance of study design in evidence-based medicine. Moreover, we discuss randomized controlled trials that are considered the gold standard to achieve high quality evidence. In this paper we will explain what the concept of person-centered care is and discuss the values associated with person-centeredness.The theoretical and methodological considerations that are relevant in applying this concept will be discussed before presenting how we intend to incorporate person-centered values into a randomized controlled trial in a novel study design that is both person-centered and randomized controlled (PC-RCT). Different aspects of this proposed novel study design will be discussed, including the theory and methods underlying this new proposed design, its novelty, different stages and practical steps involved in this proposed design. Challenges, drawbacks and possible solutions for addressing challenges of this novel design will be explored, focusing on the construct, dynamics, advantages, disadvantages and novelty of PC-RCT design.Conclusion: This paper presents how person-centered values and traditional randomised controlled trial principal values are integrated into one study design where the strengths of both concepts are merged into one. The proposed novel study design has stronger person-centered characteristics and is solid in its RCT features. This design ensures that participants have much more active participation in decision-making and gain more choice in their treatment. The proposed novel study design in this paper has clearly an important role to play in satisfying the need for a study design that can address both the need for rendering higher levels of evidence as well as simultaneously securing greater integration of person-centered values in the same study design.

scholarly journals Modern achievements in pharmacotherapy of osteoarthritis based on endo- and phenotyping

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-406
Author(s):  
I. V. Sarvilina ◽  
O. A. Shavlovskaya ◽  
O. A. Gromova ◽  
A. V. Naumov ◽  
M. N. Sharov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Disease Phenotypes ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Methodological Approaches

The review of medical literature is devoted to modern data in the field of diagnosis and treatment of osteoarthritis using endo- and phenotyping. It includes the latest data on the epidemiology of osteoarthritis of different localizations, modern definitions and classifications of osteoarthritis endotypes and phenotypes, pathobiochemical patterns and pathomorphological parallels of disease phenotypes, new methodological approaches to the phenotyping of osteoarthritis (prognostic, prescriptive phenotyping, alternative methods), as well as modern advances in pharmacotherapy of the disease based on data from selected randomized controlled trials and meta-analyzes.

scholarly journals Visual Participatory Analysis: A Qualitative Method for Engaging Participants in Interpreting the Results of Randomized Controlled Trials of Health Interventions

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenevieve Mannell ◽  
Katy Davis ◽  
Kohenour Akter ◽  
Hannah Jennings ◽  
Joanna Morrison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Qualitative Method ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Valuable Method ◽  
Unique Method ◽  
Quantitative Results ◽  
Participant Perspectives ◽  
Participatory Analysis

This article contributes to the field of mixed methods by introducing a new method for eliciting participant perspectives of the quantitative results of randomized controlled trials. Participants are rarely asked to interpret trial results, obscuring potentially valuable information about why a trial either succeeds or fails. We introduce a unique method called visual participatory analysis and discuss the insights gained in its use as part of a trial to prevent risk and reduce the prevalence of diabetes in Bangladesh. Findings highlight benefits such as elucidating contextualized explanations for null results and identifying causal mechanisms, as well as challenges around communicating randomized controlled trial methodologies to lay audiences. We conclude that visual participatory analysis is a valuable method to use after a trial.

Randomized Controlled Trials of Psychotherapy Quality Rating Scale

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
James H. Kocsis ◽  
Andrew J. Gerber ◽  
Barbara Milrod ◽  
Steven P. Roose ◽  
Jacques Barber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Quality Rating
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document