Quantification of the External Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials Supporting Clinical Care Guidelines: The Case of Thromboprophylaxis

被引:0
作者
Abdallah, Sami Morin-Ben [1 ]
Dutilleul, Aurore [1 ]
Nadon, Valerie [1 ]
Yang, Ji Wei [1 ]
Marchand-Senecal, Xavier [1 ]
Nguyen, Paul Van [1 ]
Lamarre-Cliche, Maxime [1 ]
Wistaff, Robert [1 ]
Kolan, Christophe [1 ]
Laskine, Mikhael [1 ]
Durand, Madeleine [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Montreal, Ctr Rech, Ctr Hosp, 3840 St Urbain St, Montreal, PQ H2V 3B3, Canada
关键词
American College of Chest Physicians guidelines; Exclusion criteria; External validity; Medical hospitalized patients; Padua score; Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis; Risk scores; MOLECULAR-WEIGHT HEPARIN; HOSPITALIZED MEDICAL PATIENTS; DEEP-VEIN THROMBOSIS; VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM; PREVENTION; PLACEBO; PROPHYLAXIS; INPATIENTS; MORTALITY; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.02.016
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are based on the results of several randomized controlled trials. However, due to the stringent exclusion criteria of these trials, their external validity may be low. We aimed to evaluate the external validity of the randomized controlled trials cited in the American College of Chest Physicians guidelines for the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, chart-review study of a random sample of patients admitted between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014 to the Internal Medicine ward of a large Canadian teaching university hospital. We identified the proportion of our population presenting exclusion criteria used in the randomized controlled trials cited in support of clinical care guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in the medical setting. RESULTS: Nine trials were identified for a total of 28,793 included patients following 23 distinct exclusion criteria. We included 429 patients. Median age was 65 years (interquartile ratio 51-77 years), and 236 (55%) were males. Of those not already anticoagulated at admission (n = 351), between 26% and 67% (weighted average, 51%) of our population presented at least one exclusion criterion, making them ineligible to be enrolled in randomized controlled trials. When restricting our population to patients with an indication for thromboprophylaxis based on a Padua risk score at admission >= 4, 21% to 76% (weighted average 55%) were ineligible to be enrolled in individual trials. CONCLUSIONS: Our cross-sectional study illustrates that the external validity of randomized controlled trials cited in the guidelines was low in our population, and lower when applying the risk-stratification tool recommended by guidelines. This can bias the clinicians toward treating patients that were not represented in the supporting evidence. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:740 / 745
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Assessing quality of randomized trials supporting guidelines for laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery
    Bowers, Aaron
    Meyer, Chase
    Tritz, Daniel
    Cook, Courtney
    Fuller, Kaleb
    Smith, Caleb
    Diener, Brian
    Vassar, Matt
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2018, 224 : 233 - 239
  • [22] Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties
    Andres Jung
    Julia Balzer
    Tobias Braun
    Kerstin Luedtke
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 22
  • [23] External Validity of Knee Osteoarthritis Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review
    Koog, Yun Hyung
    Lee, Jin Su
    Wi, Hyungsun
    ARCHIVES OF RHEUMATOLOGY, 2015, 30 (01) : 83 - 90
  • [24] Randomized controlled trials affecting polytrauma care
    Mejaddam, A. Y.
    Velmahos, G. C.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF TRAUMA AND EMERGENCY SURGERY, 2012, 38 (03) : 211 - 221
  • [25] Assessing the external validity of a randomized controlled trial of anthelminthics in mothers and their children in Entebbe, Uganda
    Millard, James D.
    Muhangi, Lawrence
    Sewankambo, Moses
    Ndibazza, Juliet
    Elliott, Alison M.
    Webb, Emily L.
    TRIALS, 2014, 15
  • [26] Definitions of validity terms for use in discussions of randomized controlled trials
    Yazdani, Yasaman
    Taljaard, Monica
    Zwarenstein, Merrick
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2025, 182
  • [27] Extended versus conventional thromboprophylaxis after major abdominal and pelvic surgery: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
    Rausa, Emanuele
    Kelly, Michael E.
    Asti, Emanuele
    Aiolfi, Alberto
    Bonitta, Gianluca
    Winter, Desmond C.
    Bonavina, Luigi
    SURGERY, 2018, 164 (06) : 1234 - 1240
  • [28] Transfusion thresholds: the dangers of guidelines based on randomized controlled trials
    Vincent, Jean-Louis
    INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE, 2020, 46 (04) : 714 - 716
  • [29] Considerations in Applying the Results of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials to the Care of Older Adults With Kidney Disease in the Clinical Setting: The SHARP Trial
    Butler, Catherine R.
    O'Hare, Ann M.
    ADVANCES IN CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE, 2016, 23 (01) : 29 - 35
  • [30] Haloperidol for the management of delirium in adult intensive care unit patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Zayed, Yazan
    Barbarawi, Mahmoud
    Kheiri, Babikir
    Banifadel, Momen
    Haykal, Tarek
    Chahine, Adam
    Rashdan, Laith
    Aburahma, Ahmed
    Bachuwa, Ghassan
    Seedahmed, Elfateh
    JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE, 2019, 50 : 280 - 286