Trial outcomes and information for clinical decision-making: a comparative study of opinions of health professionals

Autor: Susan J Dutton, Rachael O. Forsythe, Sara T Brookes, Kerry N L Avery, Julia Brown, Jonathan Rees, George Davey Smith, Richard Huxtable, Alfred Oliver, Rhiannon C Macefield, James Jones, Michael Thomas, Anne Russell, Mark Coleman, Robert N. Whistance, Dion Morton, David G. Jayne, Mia Card, Rowland Hackett, Anne Pullyblank, Angus G K McNair, Robin H. Kennedy, Paul A. Sylvester, Jane M Blazeby
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2016
Předmět:
Adult
Male
Research design
Health Knowledge
Attitudes
Practice
medicine.medical_specialty
Delphi Technique
Attitude of Health Personnel
Clinical Decision-Making
Alternative medicine
Delphi method
Nurses
Medicine (miscellaneous)
Risk Assessment
Likert scale
03 medical and health sciences
Postoperative Complications
0302 clinical medicine
Quality of life (healthcare)
Risk Factors
Surveys and Questionnaires
ConDuCT-II
medicine
Humans
Pharmacology (medical)
030212 general & internal medicine
Colectomy
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Surgeons
Evidence-Based Medicine
business.industry
Research
Patient Selection
Questionnaire
Evidence-based medicine
Middle Aged
3. Good health
Treatment Outcome
Research Design
Centre for Surgical Research
030220 oncology & carcinogenesis
Family medicine
Quality of Life
Female
Colorectal Neoplasms
business
Risk assessment
Zdroj: McNair, A G K, Brookes, S T, Whistance, R N, Forsythe, R O, Macefield, R C, Rees, J R E, Jones, J, Smith, G, Pullyblank, A M, Avery, K N L, Thomas, M G, Sylvester, P A, Russell, A, Oliver, A, Morton, D, Kennedy, R, Jayne, D G, Huxtable, R, Hackett, R, Dutton, S, Coleman, M, Card, M, Brown, J, Blazeby, J M 2016, ' Trial outcomes and information for clinical decision-making : a comparative study of opinions of health professionals ', Trials, vol. 17, 344 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1492-0
TRIALS
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1492-0
Popis: Background: Trials are robust sources of data for clinical practice; however, trial outcomes may not reflect what is important to communicate for decision-making. The study compared clinicians’ views of outcomes to include in a core outcome set for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, with what clinicians considered important information for clinical practice (core information). Methods: Potential outcome/information domains were identified through systematic literature reviews, reviews of hospital information leaflets and interviews with patients. These were organized into six categories and used to design a questionnaire survey that asked surgeons and nurses from a sample of CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain as an outcome or as information on a nine-point Likert scale. Respondents were re-surveyed (round 2) following group feedback (Delphi methods). Comparisons were made by calculating the difference in mean scores between the outcomes and information domains, and paired t tests were used to explore the difference between mean scores of the six outcome/information categories. Results: Data sources identified 1216 outcome/information items for CRC surgery that informed a 94-item questionnaire. First-round questionnaires were returned from 63/81 (78 %) of centers. Clinicians rated 76/94 (84 %) domains of higher importance to measure in trials than information to communicate to patients in round 1. This was reduced to 24/47 (51 %) in round 2. The greatest difference was evident in domains regarding survival, which was rated much more highly as a trial outcome than an important piece of information for decision-making (difference in mean 2.3, 95 % CI 1.9 to 2.8, p Conclusions: Whilst clinicians want to measure key outcomes in trials, they rate these as less important to communicate in decision-making with patients. This discrepancy needs to be explored and addressed to maximize the impact of trials on clinical practice.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: