Informing Evidence-Based Decision-Making for Patients with Comorbidity: Availability of Necessary Information in Clinical Trials for Chronic Diseases

被引:87
|
作者
Boyd, Cynthia M. [1 ]
Vollenweider, Daniela [2 ]
Puhan, Milo A. [3 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Med, Div Geriatr Med & Gerontol, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Med, Div Gen Internal Med, Baltimore, MD USA
[3] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Baltimore, MD USA
来源
PLOS ONE | 2012年 / 7卷 / 08期
关键词
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA; INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS; COMPETING RISKS; SELF-MANAGEMENT; HEART-FAILURE; PREVALENCE; OUTCOMES; QUALITY; CARE; MULTIMORBIDITY;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0041601
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Background: The population with multiple chronic conditions is growing. Prior studies indicate that patients with comorbidities are frequently excluded from trials but do not address whether information is available in trials to draw conclusions about treatment effects for these patients. Methods and Findings: We conducted a literature survey of trials from 11 Cochrane Reviews for four chronic diseases (diabetes, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and stroke). The Cochrane Reviews systematically identified and summarized trials on the effectiveness of diuretics, metformin, anticoagulants, longacting beta-agonists alone or in combination with inhaled corticosteroids, lipid lowering agents, exercise and diet. Eligible studies were reports of trials included in the Cochrane reviews and additional papers that described the methods of these trials. We assessed the exclusion and inclusion of people with comorbidities, the reporting of comorbidities, and whether comorbidities were considered as potential modifiers of treatment effects. Overall, the replicability of both the inclusion criteria (mean [standard deviation (SD)]: 6.0 (2.1), range (min-max): 1-9.5) and exclusion criteria(mean(SD): 5.3 (2.1), range: 1-9.5) was only moderate. Trials excluded patients with many common comorbidities. The proportion of exclusions for comorbidities ranged from 042 percent for heart failure, 0-55 percent for COPD, 0-44 percent for diabetes, and 0-39 percent for stroke. Seventy of the 161 trials (43.5%) described the prevalence of any comorbidity among participants with the index disease. The reporting of comorbidities in trials was very limited, in terms of reporting an operational definition and method of ascertainment for the presence of comorbidity and treatments for the comorbidity. It was even less common that the trials assessed whether comorbidities were potential modifiers of treatment effects. Conclusions: Comorbidities receive little attention in chronic disease trials. Given the public health importance of people with multiple chronic conditions, trials should better report on comorbidities and assess the effect comorbidities have on treatment outcomes.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cultivating an Evidence-Based Decision-Making Mindset
    Milner, Kerry A.
    Hays, Deana
    Farus-Brown, Susan
    Zonsius, Mary C.
    Fineout-Overholt, Ellen
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NURSING, 2024, 124 (02) : 40 - 46
  • [2] Factors associated with evidence-based decision-making among patients and providers
    Williams, Nyna
    Kogan, Rachel
    JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2019, 8 (09) : 709 - 720
  • [3] Rehabilitation Evidence-Based Decision-Making: The READ Model
    Novak, Iona
    te Velde, Anna
    Hines, Ashleigh
    Stanton, Emma
    Mc Namara, Maria
    Paton, Madison C. B.
    Finch-Edmondson, Megan
    Morgan, Catherine
    FRONTIERS IN REHABILITATION SCIENCES, 2021, 2
  • [4] Paying more wisely: effects of payment reforms on evidence-based clinical decision-making
    Lake, Timothy K.
    Rich, Eugene C.
    Valenzano, Christal Stone
    Maxfield, Myles M.
    JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2013, 2 (03) : 249 - 259
  • [5] Evidence-based practice: how to perform and use systematic reviews for clinical decision-making
    Kranke, Peter
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2010, 27 (09) : 763 - 772
  • [6] Publication Bias and Its Implications for Evidence-Based Clinical Decision Making
    Crawford, John M.
    Briggs, Charlotte L.
    Engeland, Christopher G.
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL EDUCATION, 2010, 74 (06) : 593 - 600
  • [7] Electronic health record: integrating evidence-based information at the point of clinical decision making
    Fowler, Susan A.
    Yaeger, Lauren H.
    Yu, Feliciano
    Doerhoff, Dwight
    Schoening, Paul
    Kelly, Betsy
    JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL LIBRARY ASSOCIATION, 2014, 102 (01) : 52 - 55
  • [8] Supporting decision-making processes for evidence-based mental health promotion
    Jane-Llopis, Eva
    Katschnig, Heinz
    McDaid, David
    Wahlbeck, Kristian
    HEALTH PROMOTION INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 26 : I140 - I146
  • [9] Practical, Evidence-Based Clinical Decision Making: Introduction to the Special Series
    Jensen-Doss, Amanda
    COGNITIVE AND BEHAVIORAL PRACTICE, 2015, 22 (01) : 1 - 4
  • [10] Tailored Implementation of Evidence-Based Practice for Patients with Chronic Diseases
    Wensing, Michel
    Huntink, Elke
    van Lieshout, Jan
    Godycki-Cwirko, Maciek
    Kowalczyk, Anna
    Jager, Cornelia
    Steinhauser, Jost
    Aakhus, Eivind
    Flottorp, Signe
    Eccles, Martin
    Baker, Richard
    PLOS ONE, 2014, 9 (07):