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
  • [11] Understanding How Patients Fare Insights Into the Health Status Patterns of Patients With Coronary Disease and the Future of Evidence-Based Shared Medical Decision-Making
    Spertus, John A.
    CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2018, 11 (03):
  • [12] Female Urinary Incontinence Evidence-Based Treatment Pathway: An Infographic for Shared Decision-Making
    McKinney, Jessica L.
    Keyser, Laura E.
    Pulliam, Samantha J.
    Ferzandi, Tanaz R.
    JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH, 2022, 31 (03) : 341 - 346
  • [13] Integrating Patient Values into Evidence-Based Practice: Effective Communication for Shared Decision-Making
    Vranceanu, Ana-Maria
    Cooper, Cynthia
    Ring, David
    HAND CLINICS, 2009, 25 (01) : 83 - +
  • [14] Mental Health Providers' Decision-Making Around the Implementation of Evidence-Based Treatment for PTSD
    Osei-Bonsu, Princess E.
    Bolton, Rendelle E.
    Stirman, Shannon Wiltsey
    Eisen, Susan V.
    Herz, Lawrence
    Pellowe, Maura E.
    JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES & RESEARCH, 2017, 44 (02) : 213 - 223
  • [15] Patient-Centered Outcome Spectrum An Evidence-based Framework to Aid in Shared Decision-making
    Ingraham, Angela M.
    Agarwal, Suresh K.
    Jung, Hee Soo
    Liepert, Amy E.
    O'Rourke, Ann P.
    Scarborough, John E.
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2018, 268 (06) : 980 - 984
  • [16] Police Decision-Making in the Absence of Evidence-Based Guidelines: Assessment of Alcohol-Intoxicated Eyewitnesses
    Pettersson, Daniel
    Bergquist, Magnus
    Hagsand, Angelica V.
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2022, 13
  • [17] Application of Big Data to Support Evidence-Based Public Health Policy Decision-Making for Hearing
    Saunders, Gabrielle H.
    Christensen, Jeppe H.
    Gutenberg, Johanna
    Pontoppidan, Niels H.
    Smith, Andrew
    Spanoudakis, George
    Bamiou, Doris-Eva
    EAR AND HEARING, 2020, 41 (05) : 1057 - 1063
  • [18] Using health technology assessment to support evidence-based decision-making in Canada: an academic perspective
    Xie, Feng
    Bowen, James M.
    Sutherland, Simone C.
    Burke, Natasha
    Blackhouse, Gord
    Tarride, Jean-Eric
    O'Reilly, Daria
    Goeree, Ron
    EXPERT REVIEW OF PHARMACOECONOMICS & OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2011, 11 (05) : 513 - 521
  • [19] Decision-Making Process Related to Participation in Phase I Clinical Trials: A Nonsystematic Review of the Existing Evidence
    Gorini, Alessandra
    Mazzocco, Ketti
    Pravettoni, Gabriella
    PUBLIC HEALTH GENOMICS, 2015, 18 (06) : 359 - 365
  • [20] Evidence-based decision-making in infectious diseases epidemiology, prevention and control: matching research questions to study designs and quality appraisal tools
    Harder, Thomas
    Takla, Anja
    Rehfuess, Eva
    Sanchez-Vivar, Alex
    Matysiak-Klose, Dorothea
    Eckmanns, Tim
    Krause, Gerard
    Gomes, Helena de Carvalho
    Jansen, Andreas
    Ellis, Simon
    Forland, Frode
    James, Roberta
    Meerpohl, Joerg J.
    Morgan, Antony
    Schuenemann, Holger
    Zuiderent-Jerak, Teun
    Wichmann, Ole
    BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2014, 14