首页 > 最新文献

Health technology assessment最新文献

英文 中文
Clinical and cost-effectiveness of detailed anomaly ultrasound screening in the first trimester: a mixed-methods study. 妊娠早期详细异常超声筛查的临床和成本效益:一项混合方法研究。
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/NLTP7102
Jehan N Karim, Helen Campbell, Pranav Pandya, Edward C F Wilson, Zarko Alfirevic, Trish Chudleigh, Elizabeth Duff, Jane Fisher, Hilary Goodman, Lisa Hinton, Christos Ioannou, Edmund Juszczak, Louise Linsell, Heather L Longworth, Kypros H Nicolaides, Anne Rhodes, Gordon Smith, Basky Thilaganathan, Jim Thornton, Gillian Yaz, Oliver Rivero-Arias, Aris T Papageorghiou
<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the United Kingdom, pregnant women are offered two scans: at 11-14 and 18-20 weeks' gestation. Current guidance supports fetal anatomical screening at the second scan, but evidence suggests earlier detection is possible.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine clinical and cost-effectiveness of a detailed two-dimensional ultrasound scan in the first trimester for detection of fetal anomalies, in addition to usual practice.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis. Nationwide survey. Analysis of National Congenital Anomaly Disease Registry data. Consensus procedure. Prospective survey of parental opinions. Probabilistic decision-analytic model for cost-effectiveness. Value-of-information analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>United Kingdom National Health Service.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Pregnant women and partners.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Detailed anomaly ultrasound at 11-14 weeks' gestation, in addition to usual practice.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Diagnostic accuracy, protocol development, health economic modelling and value-of-information analysis.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (Web of Science Core Collection); National Congenital Anomaly Disease Registry; European Congenital Anomalies Registry; Surveys of National Health Service Trusts; screening sonographers, midwives and doctors; and parents; National Schedule of National Health Service Costs (2019-20).</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>First-trimester ultrasound detects 93.3% (95% confidence interval 90.4% to 95.7%) of a pre-selected group of eight major anomalies with specificity of 99.99% (95% confidence interval 99.98% to 99.99%) and positive predictive value of 96.5% (95% confidence interval 93.3 to 98.8, 416,877 fetuses, 40 studies). For major cardiac anomalies, the respective data are 55.8% (95% confidence interval 45.9% to 65.5%), 99.98% (95% confidence interval 99.97% to 99.99%) and 94.85% (95% confidence interval 91.63% to 97.32%, 306,872 fetuses, 45 studies). Of NHS trusts surveyed, 77% currently perform first-trimester anatomy assessment, with evidence of inequity of care; earlier screening resulted in more diagnoses before 16 weeks' gestation. A consensus procedure (<i>n</i> = 172) developed an anatomical protocol and minimum targets for diagnosis. Parental survey (<i>n</i> = 1374) indicated that over 90% would opt for such screening. Modelling of singleton pregnancies undergoing earlier anomaly screening using two-dimensional ultrasound was associated with increased mean healthcare costs per woman (£11, 95% confidence interval £1 to £29) and maternal quality-adjusted life-years (0.002065, 95% confidence interval 0.000565 to 0.00358), an incremental co
背景:在英国,孕妇在妊娠11-14周和18-20周时接受两次扫描。目前的指南支持在第二次扫描时进行胎儿解剖筛查,但有证据表明,早期发现是可能的。目的:确定在常规做法之外,在妊娠早期进行详细的二维超声扫描以检测胎儿异常的临床和成本效益。设计:系统回顾和荟萃分析。全国性的调查。国家先天性异常疾病登记数据分析。达成共识的过程。家长意见的前瞻性调查。成本效益的概率决策分析模型。的信息价值分析。背景:英国国家卫生局。参与者:孕妇及伴侣。干预措施:在常规检查的基础上,在妊娠11-14周进行详细异常超声检查。主要结果测量:诊断准确性、方案制定、卫生经济模型和信息价值分析。数据来源:MEDLINE (OvidSP)、EMBASE (OvidSP)、Science Citation Index和Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (Web of Science核心馆藏);国家先天性异常疾病登记处;欧洲先天性异常登记处;全国保健服务信托调查;超声波检查员、助产士和医生;和父母;《2019- 2020年全国卫生服务费用明细表》。评价方法:诊断准确性的系统评价和荟萃分析。结果:孕早期超声检出率为93.3%(95%置信区间为90.4% ~ 95.7%),特异性为99.99%(95%置信区间为99.98% ~ 99.99%),阳性预测值为96.5%(95%置信区间为93.3 ~ 98.8,416,877例胎儿,40项研究)。对于严重心脏异常,分别为55.8%(95%置信区间45.9% ~ 65.5%)、99.98%(95%置信区间99.97% ~ 99.99%)和94.85%(95%置信区间91.63% ~ 97.32%,306,872例胎儿,45项研究)。在接受调查的NHS信托机构中,77%目前进行妊娠早期解剖评估,有证据表明护理不公平;早期的筛查导致更多的诊断在妊娠16周之前。共识程序(n = 172)制定了解剖方案和诊断的最低目标。家长调查(n = 1374)显示,超过90%的人会选择这种筛查。使用二维超声进行早期异常筛查的单胎妊娠建模与每位妇女的平均医疗保健费用(11英镑,95%置信区间为1英镑至29英镑)和产妇质量调整生命年(0.002065,95%置信区间为0.000565至0.00358)的增加相关,每个质量调整生命年的增量成本为5270英镑,每个质量调整生命年的成本可能为20,000英镑,成本效益超过95%。另外的模型预测婴儿保健费用和质量调整生命年的减少。决策不确定性低。对成本效益结果的信息价值分析显示,没有任何一组参数可以证明进一步研究减少不确定性具有成本效益。局限性:研究异质性;缺乏普遍的参考标准;简化有关经济模型结构的假设;并对一些参数的估计进行了记录和论证。这些疾病的罕见性使得对母婴长期成本和质量调整生命年的估计具有挑战性,从而可能导致对医疗保健成本的低估。结论:通过规范化和培训,妊娠早期超声胎儿异常筛查在临床上是有效的,8种主要情况的检出率超过90%,假阳性率低。围绕实施的决策不确定性很低,前瞻性研究不是有效的投资。在目前的筛查中增加妊娠早期异常筛查可能是一种具有成本效益的资源使用,并且是父母可以接受的。未来的工作:重点发展一个实施框架,以修改目前的英国胎儿异常筛查计划。研究注册:本研究注册号为PROSPERO CRD42018111781和CRD42018112434。资助:该奖项由美国国立卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目(NIHR奖励编号:17/19/10)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上;第29卷,第22号有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"Clinical and cost-effectiveness of detailed anomaly ultrasound screening in the first trimester: a mixed-methods study.","authors":"Jehan N Karim, Helen Campbell, Pranav Pandya, Edward C F Wilson, Zarko Alfirevic, Trish Chudleigh, Elizabeth Duff, Jane Fisher, Hilary Goodman, Lisa Hinton, Christos Ioannou, Edmund Juszczak, Louise Linsell, Heather L Longworth, Kypros H Nicolaides, Anne Rhodes, Gordon Smith, Basky Thilaganathan, Jim Thornton, Gillian Yaz, Oliver Rivero-Arias, Aris T Papageorghiou","doi":"10.3310/NLTP7102","DOIUrl":"10.3310/NLTP7102","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;In the United Kingdom, pregnant women are offered two scans: at 11-14 and 18-20 weeks' gestation. Current guidance supports fetal anatomical screening at the second scan, but evidence suggests earlier detection is possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;To determine clinical and cost-effectiveness of a detailed two-dimensional ultrasound scan in the first trimester for detection of fetal anomalies, in addition to usual practice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;Systematic review and meta-analysis. Nationwide survey. Analysis of National Congenital Anomaly Disease Registry data. Consensus procedure. Prospective survey of parental opinions. Probabilistic decision-analytic model for cost-effectiveness. Value-of-information analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting: &lt;/strong&gt;United Kingdom National Health Service.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Pregnant women and partners.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;Detailed anomaly ultrasound at 11-14 weeks' gestation, in addition to usual practice.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcome measures: &lt;/strong&gt;Diagnostic accuracy, protocol development, health economic modelling and value-of-information analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Data sources: &lt;/strong&gt;MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), Science Citation Index and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (Web of Science Core Collection); National Congenital Anomaly Disease Registry; European Congenital Anomalies Registry; Surveys of National Health Service Trusts; screening sonographers, midwives and doctors; and parents; National Schedule of National Health Service Costs (2019-20).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Review methods: &lt;/strong&gt;Systematic review and meta-analysis for diagnostic accuracy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;First-trimester ultrasound detects 93.3% (95% confidence interval 90.4% to 95.7%) of a pre-selected group of eight major anomalies with specificity of 99.99% (95% confidence interval 99.98% to 99.99%) and positive predictive value of 96.5% (95% confidence interval 93.3 to 98.8, 416,877 fetuses, 40 studies). For major cardiac anomalies, the respective data are 55.8% (95% confidence interval 45.9% to 65.5%), 99.98% (95% confidence interval 99.97% to 99.99%) and 94.85% (95% confidence interval 91.63% to 97.32%, 306,872 fetuses, 45 studies). Of NHS trusts surveyed, 77% currently perform first-trimester anatomy assessment, with evidence of inequity of care; earlier screening resulted in more diagnoses before 16 weeks' gestation. A consensus procedure (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 172) developed an anatomical protocol and minimum targets for diagnosis. Parental survey (&lt;i&gt;n&lt;/i&gt; = 1374) indicated that over 90% would opt for such screening. Modelling of singleton pregnancies undergoing earlier anomaly screening using two-dimensional ultrasound was associated with increased mean healthcare costs per woman (£11, 95% confidence interval £1 to £29) and maternal quality-adjusted life-years (0.002065, 95% confidence interval 0.000565 to 0.00358), an incremental co","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 22","pages":"1-250"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12146947/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144198957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Software with artificial intelligence-derived algorithms for detecting and analysing lung nodules in CT scans: systematic review and economic evaluation. CT扫描中用于检测和分析肺结节的人工智能衍生算法软件:系统回顾和经济评估。
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/JYTW8921
Julia Geppert, Peter Auguste, Asra Asgharzadeh, Hesam Ghiasvand, Mubarak Patel, Anna Brown, Surangi Jayakody, Emma Helm, Dan Todkill, Jason Madan, Chris Stinton, Daniel Gallacher, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Yen-Fu Chen
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lung cancer is one of the most common types of cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the United Kingdom. Artificial intelligence-based software has been developed to reduce the number of missed or misdiagnosed lung nodules on computed tomography images.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong> To assess the accuracy, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using  software with artificial intelligence-derived algorithms to assist in the detection and analysis of lung nodules in computed tomography scans of the chest compared with unassisted reading.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and de novo cost-effectiveness analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Searches were undertaken from 2012 to January 2022. Company submissions were accepted until 31 August 2022. Study quality was assessed using the revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2), the extension to QUADAS-2 for assessing risk of bias in comparative accuracy studies (QUADAS-C) and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Outcomes were synthesised narratively. Two decision trees were used for cost-effectiveness: (1) a simple decision tree for the detection of actionable nodules and (2) a decision tree reflecting the full clinical pathways for people undergoing chest computed tomography scans. Models estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, cost per correct detection of an actionable nodule, and cost per cancer detected and treated. We undertook scenario and sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-seven studies were included. All were rated as being at high risk of bias. Twenty-four of the included studies used retrospective data sets. Seventeen compared readers with and without artificial intelligence software. One reported prospective screening experiences before and after artificial intelligence software implementation. The remaining studies either evaluated stand-alone artificial intelligence or provided only non-comparative evidence. (1) Artificial intelligence assistance generally improved the detection of any nodules compared with unaided reading (three studies; average per-person sensitivity 0.43-0.68 for unaided and 0.79-0.99 for artificial intelligence-assisted reading), with similar or lower specificity (three studies; 0.77-1.00 for unaided and 0.81-0.97 for artificial intelligence-assisted reading). Nodule diameters were similar or significantly larger with semiautomatic measurements than with manual measurements. Intra-reader and inter-reader agreement in nodule size measurement and in risk classification generally improved with artificial intelligence assistance or were comparable to those with unaided reading. However, the effect on measurement accuracy is unclear. (2) Radiologist reading time generally decreased with artificial intelligence assistance in research settings. (3) Artific
背景:肺癌是英国最常见的癌症类型之一,也是癌症死亡的主要原因。基于人工智能的软件已经被开发出来,以减少计算机断层扫描图像中漏诊或误诊的肺结节数量。目的:评价在胸部计算机断层扫描中使用带有人工智能算法的软件辅助检测和分析肺结节的准确性、临床效果和成本效益,并与无辅助阅读进行比较。设计:系统回顾和重新成本效益分析。方法:检索时间为2012年至2022年1月。公司提交的文件被接受到2022年8月31日。使用修订后的诊断准确性研究质量评估工具(QUADAS-2)、扩展到QUADAS-2的比较准确性研究偏倚风险评估工具(QUADAS-C)和基于共识的健康状况测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)检查清单对研究质量进行评估。综合叙述结果。两种决策树用于成本效益:(1)检测可操作结节的简单决策树和(2)反映接受胸部计算机断层扫描的人的完整临床路径的决策树。模型估计了增量成本-效果比、每次正确检测可操作结节的成本,以及每次检测和治疗癌症的成本。我们进行了情景分析和敏感性分析。结果:纳入27项研究。所有这些都被评为具有高偏倚风险。纳入的研究中有24项采用回顾性数据集。17人比较了使用和不使用人工智能软件的读者。一篇报告了人工智能软件实施前后的前瞻性筛查经验。其余的研究要么评估独立的人工智能,要么只提供非比较性的证据。(1)与独立阅读相比,人工智能辅助总体上提高了任何结节的检测(三项研究;独立阅读的平均每人敏感度为0.43-0.68,人工智能辅助阅读的平均每人敏感度为0.79-0.99),特异性相似或更低(三项研究;独立阅读为0.77-1.00,人工智能辅助阅读为0.81-0.97)。与人工测量相比,半自动测量的结节直径相似或明显更大。在人工智能辅助下,阅读者内部和阅读者之间在结节大小测量和风险分类方面的一致性普遍得到改善,或与无辅助阅读的人相当。然而,对测量精度的影响尚不清楚。(2)在研究环境中,人工智能辅助下放射科医生的阅读时间普遍减少。(3)人工智能辅助倾向于增加临床指南定义的分配风险类别。(4)没有相关的临床疗效和成本-效果研究。(5)重新开始的成本效益分析表明,对于有症状的和偶然的人群,人工智能辅助的计算机断层扫描图像分析在每次正确检测可操作结节的成本上优于独立的放射科医生。然而,当包括完整临床途径的相关成本和质量调整生命年时,人工智能辅助的计算机断层扫描阅读由独立的读者主导。对于筛查,人工智能辅助的计算机断层扫描图像分析在基本情况和所有敏感性和情景分析中都具有成本效益。局限性:由于临床有效性证据的异质性、稀疏性、低质量和低适用性,以及将检测准确性证据与临床和经济结果联系起来的主要挑战,本文的研究结果具有高度不确定性,并为未来评估提供了指标/框架。结论:计算机断层扫描图像的人工智能辅助分析可以减少肺结节测量和临床管理的变异性,提高一致性。人工智能可能会增加结节和癌症的检测,但也可能增加不必要地接受计算机断层扫描监测的患者数量。没有发现直接的比较证据,也没有发现任何关于临床结果和成本效益的直接证据。人工智能辅助图像分析在筛查肺癌方面可能具有成本效益,但对于有症状的人群则不然。但是,根据目前的证据无法获得可靠的成本效益估计。研究注册:本研究注册号为PROSPERO CRD42021298449。 资助:该奖项由美国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)证据综合计划(NIHR奖励编号:NIHR135325)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》上;第29卷第14期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"Software with artificial intelligence-derived algorithms for detecting and analysing lung nodules in CT scans: systematic review and economic evaluation.","authors":"Julia Geppert, Peter Auguste, Asra Asgharzadeh, Hesam Ghiasvand, Mubarak Patel, Anna Brown, Surangi Jayakody, Emma Helm, Dan Todkill, Jason Madan, Chris Stinton, Daniel Gallacher, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Yen-Fu Chen","doi":"10.3310/JYTW8921","DOIUrl":"10.3310/JYTW8921","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Lung cancer is one of the most common types of cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the United Kingdom. Artificial intelligence-based software has been developed to reduce the number of missed or misdiagnosed lung nodules on computed tomography images.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt; To assess the accuracy, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using  software with artificial intelligence-derived algorithms to assist in the detection and analysis of lung nodules in computed tomography scans of the chest compared with unassisted reading.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;Systematic review and de novo cost-effectiveness analysis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;Searches were undertaken from 2012 to January 2022. Company submissions were accepted until 31 August 2022. Study quality was assessed using the revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2), the extension to QUADAS-2 for assessing risk of bias in comparative accuracy studies (QUADAS-C) and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Outcomes were synthesised narratively. Two decision trees were used for cost-effectiveness: (1) a simple decision tree for the detection of actionable nodules and (2) a decision tree reflecting the full clinical pathways for people undergoing chest computed tomography scans. Models estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, cost per correct detection of an actionable nodule, and cost per cancer detected and treated. We undertook scenario and sensitivity analyses.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Twenty-seven studies were included. All were rated as being at high risk of bias. Twenty-four of the included studies used retrospective data sets. Seventeen compared readers with and without artificial intelligence software. One reported prospective screening experiences before and after artificial intelligence software implementation. The remaining studies either evaluated stand-alone artificial intelligence or provided only non-comparative evidence. (1) Artificial intelligence assistance generally improved the detection of any nodules compared with unaided reading (three studies; average per-person sensitivity 0.43-0.68 for unaided and 0.79-0.99 for artificial intelligence-assisted reading), with similar or lower specificity (three studies; 0.77-1.00 for unaided and 0.81-0.97 for artificial intelligence-assisted reading). Nodule diameters were similar or significantly larger with semiautomatic measurements than with manual measurements. Intra-reader and inter-reader agreement in nodule size measurement and in risk classification generally improved with artificial intelligence assistance or were comparable to those with unaided reading. However, the effect on measurement accuracy is unclear. (2) Radiologist reading time generally decreased with artificial intelligence assistance in research settings. (3) Artific","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 14","pages":"1-234"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12104856/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144086170","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Rapid tests to inform triage and antibiotic prescribing decisions for adults presenting with suspected acute respiratory infection: a rapid evidence synthesis of clinical effectiveness and cost-utility studies. 为疑似急性呼吸道感染的成人提供分诊和抗生素处方决策信息的快速检测:临床有效性和成本效用研究的快速证据综合
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/KHGP7129
Katie Scandrett, Jill Colquitt, Rachel Court, Fiona Whiter, Bethany Shinkins, Yemisi Takwoingi, Emma Loveman, Daniel Todkill, Paramjit Gill, Daniel Lasserson, Lena Al-Khudairy, Amy Grove, Yen-Fu Chen

Background: This review assessed the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care tests to guide the initial management of people presenting with suspected acute respiratory infection.

Methods: Searches for systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials and cost-utility studies were conducted in May 2023. Sources included MEDLINE, Epistemonikos, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cost-effectiveness Analysis Registry and reference checking. Eligible studies included people (≥ 16 years) making initial contact with the health system with symptoms suggestive of acute respiratory infection. Risk of bias in randomised controlled trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The Drummond checklist was used for cost-utility studies. Meta-analyses of clinical outcomes were conducted to estimate summary risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Study characteristics and main results were summarised narratively and tabulated.

Results: Fourteen randomised controlled trials were included; all had a high risk of bias. Ten randomised controlled trials analysed point-of-care tests for C-reactive protein. Compared with usual care, the effects on hospital admissions and mortality were highly uncertain due to sparse data. Three randomised controlled trials had heterogeneous findings on the resolution of symptoms/time to full recovery. The risk of re-consultations increased in patients receiving C-reactive protein point-of-care tests (pooled risk ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 2.41; four studies). There was a reduction in antibiotics initially prescribed (C-reactive protein point-of-care tests vs. usual care: pooled risk ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 0.84; nine studies). The effects of procalcitonin point-of-care tests compared with usual care on hospital admission, escalation of care, and duration of symptoms were very uncertain as only one randomised controlled trial was included. The study found a large reduction in antibiotic prescriptions within 7 days. Two studies revealed a large reduction in initial antibiotic prescriptions for Group A streptococcus point-of-care tests versus usual care. Only one study compared an influenza point-of-care test with usual care. The effect of the antibiotics prescribed was very uncertain. No deaths occurred in either treatment group.

Cost-effectiveness: Six of the 17 included cost-utility studies were judged to be directly applicable to our review, 4 of which focused on the C-reactive protein point-of-care test. The results suggested that the C-reactive protein point-of-care test is potentially cost-effective; these studies were generally limited to capturing only short-term costs and consequences. One study evaluated 14 different point-of-care tests for Group A streptococcus; none were cost-effective compared with usual care. A further study evaluated two rapid tests (

背景:本综述评估了用于指导疑似急性呼吸道感染患者初始管理的即时检测的临床和成本效益。方法:检索于2023年5月进行的系统评价、随机对照试验和成本-效用研究。来源包括MEDLINE、Epistemonikos、EMBASE、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Cost-effectiveness Analysis Registry和参考文献检查。符合条件的研究包括最初与卫生系统接触并有提示急性呼吸道感染症状的人群(≥16岁)。随机对照试验的偏倚风险使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行评估。德拉蒙德清单用于成本效用研究。对临床结果进行荟萃分析,以95%的置信区间估计总风险比。对研究特点和主要结果进行叙述总结并制成表格。结果:纳入14项随机对照试验;所有的研究都有很高的偏倚风险。10个随机对照试验分析了c反应蛋白的即时检测。与常规护理相比,由于数据稀疏,对住院率和死亡率的影响高度不确定。三个随机对照试验在症状缓解/完全恢复时间方面有不同的发现。接受c反应蛋白即时检测的患者再次就诊的风险增加(合并风险比1.61,95%可信区间1.07 ~ 2.41;四个研究)。最初处方的抗生素减少(c反应蛋白即时检测与常规治疗相比:合并风险比0.75,95%可信区间0.68至0.84;九个研究)。与常规治疗相比,降钙素原即时检测对入院、治疗升级和症状持续时间的影响非常不确定,因为只纳入了一项随机对照试验。研究发现,抗生素处方在7天内大幅减少。两项研究显示,与常规护理相比,a组链球菌即时检测的初始抗生素处方大幅减少。只有一项研究将流感即时检测与常规护理进行了比较。所开抗生素的效果非常不确定。两组均无死亡病例发生。成本-效果:17项纳入的成本-效用研究中有6项被认为直接适用于我们的综述,其中4项集中于c反应蛋白即时检测。结果表明,c反应蛋白即时检测具有潜在的成本效益;这些研究通常仅限于捕捉短期成本和后果。一项研究评估了14种不同的A群链球菌护理点检测;与常规护理相比,没有一项具有成本效益。进一步的研究评估了两种快速检测方法(Quidel检测流感[Quidel Corp, San Diego, CA, USA]和BinaxNOW [Binax, Inc., Portland, ME, USA])与培养/血清学相比较,发现它们不具有成本效益。局限性:采用快速合成方法,可能遗漏相关研究。有几个复习问题没有找到证据。结论:c反应蛋白即时检测可减少使用抗生素处方的患者数量,但可增加复诊率。c反应蛋白即时检测可能具有潜在的成本效益,但现有的估计是基于非常小的和不确定的质量调整生命年的收益,并且只考虑了短期成本和后果。其他即时检测的证据非常有限或缺乏。未来的工作:需要进行研究,以探索护理点测试对不同临床环境中分诊决策的影响,并量化其长期健康和成本后果。研究注册:本研究注册号为PROSPERO CRD42023429515。资助:该奖项由美国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)证据综合计划(NIHR奖励编号:NIHR159946)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》上;第29卷第13期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"Rapid tests to inform triage and antibiotic prescribing decisions for adults presenting with suspected acute respiratory infection: a rapid evidence synthesis of clinical effectiveness and cost-utility studies.","authors":"Katie Scandrett, Jill Colquitt, Rachel Court, Fiona Whiter, Bethany Shinkins, Yemisi Takwoingi, Emma Loveman, Daniel Todkill, Paramjit Gill, Daniel Lasserson, Lena Al-Khudairy, Amy Grove, Yen-Fu Chen","doi":"10.3310/KHGP7129","DOIUrl":"10.3310/KHGP7129","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This review assessed the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of point-of-care tests to guide the initial management of people presenting with suspected acute respiratory infection.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Searches for systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials and cost-utility studies were conducted in May 2023. Sources included MEDLINE, Epistemonikos, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cost-effectiveness Analysis Registry and reference checking. Eligible studies included people (≥ 16 years) making initial contact with the health system with symptoms suggestive of acute respiratory infection. Risk of bias in randomised controlled trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. The Drummond checklist was used for cost-utility studies. Meta-analyses of clinical outcomes were conducted to estimate summary risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Study characteristics and main results were summarised narratively and tabulated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen randomised controlled trials were included; all had a high risk of bias. Ten randomised controlled trials analysed point-of-care tests for C-reactive protein. Compared with usual care, the effects on hospital admissions and mortality were highly uncertain due to sparse data. Three randomised controlled trials had heterogeneous findings on the resolution of symptoms/time to full recovery. The risk of re-consultations increased in patients receiving C-reactive protein point-of-care tests (pooled risk ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 2.41; four studies). There was a reduction in antibiotics initially prescribed (C-reactive protein point-of-care tests vs. usual care: pooled risk ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 0.84; nine studies). The effects of procalcitonin point-of-care tests compared with usual care on hospital admission, escalation of care, and duration of symptoms were very uncertain as only one randomised controlled trial was included. The study found a large reduction in antibiotic prescriptions within 7 days. Two studies revealed a large reduction in initial antibiotic prescriptions for Group A streptococcus point-of-care tests versus usual care. Only one study compared an influenza point-of-care test with usual care. The effect of the antibiotics prescribed was very uncertain. No deaths occurred in either treatment group.</p><p><strong>Cost-effectiveness: </strong>Six of the 17 included cost-utility studies were judged to be directly applicable to our review, 4 of which focused on the C-reactive protein point-of-care test. The results suggested that the C-reactive protein point-of-care test is potentially cost-effective; these studies were generally limited to capturing only short-term costs and consequences. One study evaluated 14 different point-of-care tests for Group A streptococcus; none were cost-effective compared with usual care. A further study evaluated two rapid tests (","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 13","pages":"1-114"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12104858/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144086168","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for the management of sleep problems in people with fibromyalgia: a multi-methods evidence synthesis. 药物和非药物干预对纤维肌痛患者睡眠问题管理的影响:多方法证据综合。
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/GTBR7561
Mari Imamura, Clare Robertson, Jemma Hudson, Daniel Whibley, Lorna Aucott, Katie Gillies, Marcus Beasley, Martin J Stevens, Paul Manson, Debra Dulake, Abhishek Abhishek, Nicole Ky Tang, Gary J Macfarlane, Miriam Brazzelli

Background: Fibromyalgia is a chronic condition characterised by widespread musculoskeletal pain. Sleep problems are reported by 92% of people living with fibromyalgia.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of interventions for the management of fibromyalgia-related sleep problems; explore the experiences of people with fibromyalgia-related sleep problems and examine the content of patient-reported outcome measures for 'sleep quality'.

Methods: We conducted: (1) a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions; (2) a systematic thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence; (3) a content analysis of existing patient-reported outcome measures validated in people with fibromyalgia. Major electronic databases were searched in November 2021.

Results: One hundred and sixty-eight studies were included in the effectiveness synthesis. The network meta-analysis assessing sleep quality included 35 treatment categories from 65 studies (8247 participants). Most studies were at high overall risk of bias. There is some evidence that compared with placebo or sham treatments, some forms of exercise [i.e. land-based aerobic exercise training in combination with flexibility training (standardised mean difference -4.69, credible interval -8.14 to -1.28) and aquatic-based aerobic exercise training (standardised mean difference -2.63, credible interval -4.74 to -0.58)] may improve sleep. There is also a suggestion that land-based strengthening exercise, psychological and behavioural therapies with a focus on sleep, electrotherapy, weight loss, dental splints, antipsychotics and tricyclics may have a modest effect on sleep, but credible intervals are wide. For other interventions, there is no clear evidence of beneficial effects on sleep. Our certainty of current evidence was predominantly low to very low. The thematic synthesis highlighted the bidirectional relationship between sleep and pain. Twenty-one sleep domains were identified across five patient-reported outcome measures. The domain most frequently identified was sleep maintenance. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was the most comprehensive tool (15 domains), followed by the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (11 domains).

Limitations: Quantitative studies varied considerably in terms of characteristics of interventions, control treatments and type of outcome measures. In the network, most interventions were compared with placebo, sham treatment or usual care and not with another active treatment. In general, studies were small, unblinded and of short duration (median 12 weeks). For the qualitative synthesis and patient-reported outcome measures analysis, it is unclear whether study participants are adequately representative of the wider population of fibromyalgia patients due to poor reporting

背景:纤维肌痛是一种以广泛的肌肉骨骼疼痛为特征的慢性疾病。92%的纤维肌痛患者报告有睡眠问题。目的:评价纤维肌痛相关睡眠问题干预措施的有效性和安全性;探索纤维肌痛相关睡眠问题患者的经历,并检查患者报告的“睡眠质量”结果测量的内容。方法:我们进行了:(1)随机对照试验的网络荟萃分析,比较药物和非药物干预的有效性;(2)对定性证据进行系统的专题综合;(3)对现有纤维肌痛患者报告的结果指标进行内容分析。主要电子数据库于2021年11月进行了检索。结果:疗效综合纳入168项研究。评估睡眠质量的网络荟萃分析包括来自65项研究(8247名参与者)的35个治疗类别。大多数研究总体偏倚风险较高。有证据表明,与安慰剂或假治疗相比,某些形式的运动[即陆上有氧运动训练结合柔韧性训练(标准化平均差为-4.69,可信区间为-8.14至-1.28)和水上有氧运动训练(标准化平均差为-2.63,可信区间为-4.74至-0.58)]可以改善睡眠。还有一种建议认为,陆上强化锻炼、以睡眠为重点的心理和行为疗法、电疗、减肥、牙夹板、抗精神病药物和三轮车可能对睡眠有一定的影响,但可信的间隔时间很长。对于其他干预措施,没有明确的证据表明对睡眠有有益的影响。我们对当前证据的确信程度主要是低到非常低。主题综合强调了睡眠和疼痛之间的双向关系。在5个患者报告的结果测量中确定了21个睡眠域。最常被发现的领域是睡眠维持。匹兹堡睡眠质量指数是最全面的工具(15个领域),其次是医学结果研究睡眠量表(11个领域)。局限性:定量研究在干预措施的特征、对照治疗和结果测量类型方面差异很大。在网络中,大多数干预措施与安慰剂、假治疗或常规护理进行比较,而不是与另一种积极治疗进行比较。一般来说,研究规模小、非盲法且持续时间短(中位12周)。对于定性综合和患者报告的结果测量分析,由于人口统计数据报告不足,尚不清楚研究参与者是否足以代表更广泛的纤维肌痛患者群体。结论:某些形式的运动可能对纤维肌痛患者的睡眠问题有效。然而,目前证据基础的异质性、不精确性和低质量阻碍了任何确定的结论。定性数据表明,睡眠不佳是纤维肌痛患者常见的严重致残问题,对他们的其他症状(如疼痛)、健康和福祉产生负面影响。虽然我们发现患者报告的结果测量的项目内容存在异质性,但所有与睡眠质量相关的捕获结构在概念上都足够相似,可以合并在一个综合中。未来的工作:需要高质量的研究来调查哪些干预措施更可能有效地治疗纤维肌痛相关的睡眠问题。未来的研究必须与纤维肌痛患者合作设计,并包括适当的比较治疗。预先注册研究方案是必要的。研究注册:本研究注册号为PROSPERO CRD42021296922。资助:该奖项由美国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目(NIHR奖励编号:NIHR132999)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上;第29卷第20期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"Effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions for the management of sleep problems in people with fibromyalgia: a multi-methods evidence synthesis.","authors":"Mari Imamura, Clare Robertson, Jemma Hudson, Daniel Whibley, Lorna Aucott, Katie Gillies, Marcus Beasley, Martin J Stevens, Paul Manson, Debra Dulake, Abhishek Abhishek, Nicole Ky Tang, Gary J Macfarlane, Miriam Brazzelli","doi":"10.3310/GTBR7561","DOIUrl":"10.3310/GTBR7561","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fibromyalgia is a chronic condition characterised by widespread musculoskeletal pain. Sleep problems are reported by 92% of people living with fibromyalgia.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of interventions for the management of fibromyalgia-related sleep problems; explore the experiences of people with fibromyalgia-related sleep problems and examine the content of patient-reported outcome measures for 'sleep quality'.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted: (1) a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions; (2) a systematic thematic synthesis of qualitative evidence; (3) a content analysis of existing patient-reported outcome measures validated in people with fibromyalgia. Major electronic databases were searched in November 2021.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and sixty-eight studies were included in the effectiveness synthesis. The network meta-analysis assessing sleep quality included 35 treatment categories from 65 studies (8247 participants). Most studies were at high overall risk of bias. There is some evidence that compared with placebo or sham treatments, some forms of exercise [i.e. land-based aerobic exercise training in combination with flexibility training (standardised mean difference -4.69, credible interval -8.14 to -1.28) and aquatic-based aerobic exercise training (standardised mean difference -2.63, credible interval -4.74 to -0.58)] may improve sleep. There is also a suggestion that land-based strengthening exercise, psychological and behavioural therapies with a focus on sleep, electrotherapy, weight loss, dental splints, antipsychotics and tricyclics may have a modest effect on sleep, but credible intervals are wide. For other interventions, there is no clear evidence of beneficial effects on sleep. Our certainty of current evidence was predominantly low to very low. The thematic synthesis highlighted the bidirectional relationship between sleep and pain. Twenty-one sleep domains were identified across five patient-reported outcome measures. The domain most frequently identified was sleep maintenance. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was the most comprehensive tool (15 domains), followed by the Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (11 domains).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Quantitative studies varied considerably in terms of characteristics of interventions, control treatments and type of outcome measures. In the network, most interventions were compared with placebo, sham treatment or usual care and not with another active treatment. In general, studies were small, unblinded and of short duration (median 12 weeks). For the qualitative synthesis and patient-reported outcome measures analysis, it is unclear whether study participants are adequately representative of the wider population of fibromyalgia patients due to poor reporting","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 20","pages":"1-228"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12146952/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144198955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Clinical and cost-effectiveness of lithium versus quetiapine augmentation for treatment-resistant depression in adults: LQD a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. 锂与奎硫平增强治疗成人难治性抑郁症的临床和成本效益:LQD一项实用的随机对照试验
IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/YQVF5347
Jess Kerr-Gaffney, Zohra Zenasni, Kimberley Goldsmith, Nahel Yaziji, Huajie Jin, Alessandro Colasanti, John Geddes, David Kessler, R Hamish McAllister-Williams, Allan H Young, Alvaro Barrera, Lindsey Marwood, Rachael W Taylor, Helena Tee, Anthony J Cleare
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lithium and several atypical antipsychotics are the recommended first-line augmentation options for treatment-resistant depression; however, few studies have compared them directly, and none for longer than 8 weeks. Consequently, there is little evidence-based guidance for clinicians when choosing an augmentation option for patients with treatment-resistant depression.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This trial examined whether it is more clinically and cost-effective to prescribe lithium or quetiapine augmentation therapy for patients with treatment-resistant depression over 12 months.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was a parallel group, multicentre, pragmatic, open-label superiority trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of lithium versus quetiapine augmentation of antidepressant medication in treatment-resistant depression. Participants were randomised 1 : 1 at baseline to the decision to prescribe either lithium or quetiapine.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Six National Health Service trusts in England.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Eligible participants were aged ≥ 18 years, met <i>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders</i>, Fifth Edition criteria for major depressive disorder, scored ≥ 14 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and whose depression had had an inadequate response to at least two therapeutic antidepressant treatment trials in the current episode, with a current antidepressant treatment at or above the therapeutic dose for ≥ 6 weeks. Patients with a history of psychosis or bipolar disorder were excluded. Patients were judged suitable for either treatment.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>After randomisation, pre-prescribing safety checks were undertaken as per standard care and trial clinicians decided whether to proceed with prescribing the allocated medication. Trial clinicians received recommendations for titration and dosing in line with current clinical guidelines; however, dosing regimens could be altered according to tolerability and response. Participants were followed up using weekly self-report questionnaires and 8-, 26- and 52-week research visits.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The co-primary outcome measures were depressive symptom severity over 52 weeks, measured weekly using the self-rated Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, and time to all-cause treatment discontinuation of the trial medication. Economic analyses compared costs between the two treatment arms over 52 weeks, from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective, and a societal perspective.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and twelve participants were randomised, 107 to quetiapine and 105 to lithium. The quetiapine arm showed a significantly greater reduction in depressive symptoms than the lithium arm over 52 weeks (quetiapine vs. lithium area under the differences curve = -68.36, 95% confidence interval:
背景:锂和几种非典型抗精神病药物是治疗难治性抑郁症的首选首选;然而,很少有研究直接比较它们,也没有超过8周的研究。因此,临床医生在为难治性抑郁症患者选择增强治疗方案时,几乎没有循证指导。目的:本试验探讨对12个月以上的难治性抑郁症患者开锂或喹硫平辅助治疗是否更具临床和成本效益。设计:这是一项平行组、多中心、实用、开放标签的优势试验,比较锂与喹硫平增强抗抑郁药物治疗难治性抑郁症的临床和成本效益。参与者在基线时按1:1随机分组,决定开锂或喹硫平。背景:英格兰的六个国家卫生服务信托机构。参与者:符合条件的参与者年龄≥18岁,符合《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》第五版重性抑郁症标准,17项汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表得分≥14分,当前发作中对至少两项治疗性抗抑郁药物治疗试验反应不足,当前抗抑郁药物治疗剂量≥6周。排除有精神病史或双相情感障碍的患者。判断患者适合任何一种治疗。干预措施:随机化后,按照标准护理进行处方前安全检查,试验临床医生决定是否继续处方分配的药物。试验临床医生收到了符合当前临床指南的滴定和给药建议;然而,可以根据耐受性和反应改变给药方案。参与者通过每周自我报告问卷和8周、26周和52周的研究访问进行随访。主要结局指标:共同主要结局指标为52周内抑郁症状严重程度,每周使用自评抑郁症状快速量表测量,以及全因治疗停止试验药物的时间。经济分析从国家卫生服务和个人社会服务的角度以及社会的角度比较了两个治疗组在52周内的成本。结果:212名参与者被随机分组,107人接受喹硫平治疗,105人接受锂治疗。在52周内,喹硫平组抑郁症状的减轻明显大于锂组(喹硫平与锂组差异曲线下面积= -68.36,95%可信区间:-129.95至-6.76,p = 0.0296)。两组的中位停药天数无显著差异(喹硫平= 365.0,四分位数范围= 57.0-365.0,锂= 212.0,四分位数范围= 21.0-365.0),p = 0.1196。喹硫平比锂更具成本效益。记录了32例严重不良事件,其中只有1例被认为可能与干预(锂)有关。局限性:该试验是非盲法的,因此对试验药物的预期可能会影响结果。此外,一些次要结局指标的数据大量缺失。结论:喹硫平不仅更具成本效益,而且可能是治疗难治性抑郁症的一种更有效的临床强化选择。未来的工作:检查治疗反应的预测因素,包括临床、社会人口统计学和生物学因素,将有助于确定在选择治疗难治性抑郁症的强化治疗时是否需要考虑其他因素。试验注册:该试验注册号为ISRCTN16387615。资助:该奖项由美国国立卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目(NIHR奖励编号:14/222/02)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上;第29卷,第12期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"Clinical and cost-effectiveness of lithium versus quetiapine augmentation for treatment-resistant depression in adults: LQD a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Jess Kerr-Gaffney, Zohra Zenasni, Kimberley Goldsmith, Nahel Yaziji, Huajie Jin, Alessandro Colasanti, John Geddes, David Kessler, R Hamish McAllister-Williams, Allan H Young, Alvaro Barrera, Lindsey Marwood, Rachael W Taylor, Helena Tee, Anthony J Cleare","doi":"10.3310/YQVF5347","DOIUrl":"10.3310/YQVF5347","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Lithium and several atypical antipsychotics are the recommended first-line augmentation options for treatment-resistant depression; however, few studies have compared them directly, and none for longer than 8 weeks. Consequently, there is little evidence-based guidance for clinicians when choosing an augmentation option for patients with treatment-resistant depression.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;This trial examined whether it is more clinically and cost-effective to prescribe lithium or quetiapine augmentation therapy for patients with treatment-resistant depression over 12 months.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;This was a parallel group, multicentre, pragmatic, open-label superiority trial comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of lithium versus quetiapine augmentation of antidepressant medication in treatment-resistant depression. Participants were randomised 1 : 1 at baseline to the decision to prescribe either lithium or quetiapine.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting: &lt;/strong&gt;Six National Health Service trusts in England.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Eligible participants were aged ≥ 18 years, met &lt;i&gt;Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders&lt;/i&gt;, Fifth Edition criteria for major depressive disorder, scored ≥ 14 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and whose depression had had an inadequate response to at least two therapeutic antidepressant treatment trials in the current episode, with a current antidepressant treatment at or above the therapeutic dose for ≥ 6 weeks. Patients with a history of psychosis or bipolar disorder were excluded. Patients were judged suitable for either treatment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;After randomisation, pre-prescribing safety checks were undertaken as per standard care and trial clinicians decided whether to proceed with prescribing the allocated medication. Trial clinicians received recommendations for titration and dosing in line with current clinical guidelines; however, dosing regimens could be altered according to tolerability and response. Participants were followed up using weekly self-report questionnaires and 8-, 26- and 52-week research visits.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcome measures: &lt;/strong&gt;The co-primary outcome measures were depressive symptom severity over 52 weeks, measured weekly using the self-rated Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, and time to all-cause treatment discontinuation of the trial medication. Economic analyses compared costs between the two treatment arms over 52 weeks, from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective, and a societal perspective.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;Two hundred and twelve participants were randomised, 107 to quetiapine and 105 to lithium. The quetiapine arm showed a significantly greater reduction in depressive symptoms than the lithium arm over 52 weeks (quetiapine vs. lithium area under the differences curve = -68.36, 95% confidence interval: ","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 12","pages":"1-118"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12086606/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143994586","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Mortality impact, risks, and benefits of general population screening for ovarian cancer: the UKCTOCS randomised controlled trial. 卵巢癌症普通人群筛查的死亡率影响、风险和益处:UKCTOCS随机对照试验。
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/BHBR5832
Usha Menon, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj, Matthew Burnell, Andy Ryan, Jatinderpal K Kalsi, Naveena Singh, Anne Dawnay, Lesley Fallowfield, Alistair J McGuire, Stuart Campbell, Steven J Skates, Mahesh Parmar, Ian J Jacobs

Background: Ovarian and tubal cancers are lethal gynaecological cancers, with over 50% of the patients diagnosed at advanced stage.

Trial design: Randomised controlled trial involving 27 primary care trusts adjacent to 13 trial centres based at NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Methods: Postmenopausal average-risk women, aged 50-74, with intact ovaries and no previous ovarian or current non-ovarian cancer.

Interventions: One of two annual screening strategies: (1) multimodal screening (MMS) using a longitudinal CA125 algorithm with repeat CA125 testing and transvaginal scan (TVS) as second line test (2) ultrasound screening (USS) using TVS alone with repeat scan to confirm any abnormality. The control (C) group had no screening. Follow-up was through linkage to national registries, postal follow-up questionnaires and direct communication with trial centres and participants.

Objective: To assess comprehensively risks and benefits of ovarian cancer screening in the general population.

Outcome: Primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer as assigned by an independent outcomes review committee. Secondary outcomes included incidence and stage at diagnosis of ovarian and tubal cancer, compliance, performance characteristics, harms and cost-effectiveness of the two screening strategies and a bioresource for future research.

Randomisation: The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to MMS, USS and C groups in a 1:1:2 ratio.

Blinding: Investigators and participants were unblinded and outcomes review committee was masked to randomisation group.

Analyses: Primary analyses were by intention to screen, comparing separately MMS and USS with C using the Versatile test.

Results: 1,243,282 women were invited and 205,090 attended for recruitment between April 2001 and September 2005.

Randomised: 202,638 women: 50,640 MMS, 50,639 USS and 101,359 C group.

Numbers analysed for primary outcome: 202,562 (>99.9%): 50,625 (>99.9%) MMS, 50,623 (>99.9%) USS, and 101,314 (>99.9%) C group.

Outcome: Women in MMS and USS groups underwent 345,570 and 327,775 annual screens between randomisation and 31 December 2011. At median follow-up of 16.3 (IQR 15.1-17.3) years, 2055 women developed ovarian or tubal cancer: 522 (1.0% of 50,625) MMS, 517 (1.0% of 50,623) USS, and 1016 (1.0% of 101314) in C group. Compared to the C group, in the MMS group, the incidence of Stage I/II disease was 39.2% (95% CI 16.1 to 66.9) higher and stage III/IV 10.2% (95% CI -21.3 to 2.4) lower. There was no difference in stage in the USS group. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0.6%) MMS, 291 (0.6%) US

背景:卵巢癌和输卵管癌是致命的妇科癌症,超过50%的患者被诊断为晚期。试验设计:随机对照试验,涉及27个初级保健信托基金,毗邻英格兰、威尔士和北爱尔兰NHS信托基金的13个试验中心。方法:绝经后平均风险女性,年龄50-74岁,卵巢完整,既往无卵巢癌或非卵巢癌症。干预措施:两种年度筛查策略之一:(1)使用纵向CA125算法进行多模式筛查(MMS),重复CA125检测和经阴道扫描(TVS)作为二线检测(2)单独使用TVS进行超声筛查(USS),重复扫描以确认任何异常。对照组(C)未进行筛查。后续行动是通过与国家登记处的联系、邮寄后续调查问卷以及与试验中心和参与者的直接沟通进行的。目的:全面评估癌症筛查在普通人群中的风险和益处。结果:主要结果是由独立结果审查委员会指定的卵巢或输卵管癌症死亡。次要结果包括卵巢和输卵管癌症的发病率和诊断阶段、两种筛查策略的依从性、性能特征、危害和成本效益以及未来研究的生物源。随机:试验管理系统确认了参与者的资格,并使用计算机生成的随机数以1:1:2的比例将参与者随机分配给MMS、USS和C组。盲法:研究者和参与者被揭盲,结果审查委员会被随机分组。分析:初步分析是通过意向筛选,使用多功能测试分别比较MMS和USS与C。结果:2001年4月至2005年9月,1243282名女性受邀参加招募,205090人参加招募。随机抽取:202638名女性:50640名MMS、50639名USS和101359名C组。主要结果分析的数字:202562(>99.9%):50625(>99.9%。结果:从随机分组到2011年12月31日,MMS和USS组的女性分别接受了345570和327775次年度筛查。在中位随访16.3年(IQR 15.1-17.3)时,2055名女性患上了卵巢或输卵管癌症:C组有522例(占50625例的1.0%)MMS,517例(占50523例的1.0%,)USS,1016例(占101314例的1.0%。与C组相比,MMS组I/II期疾病的发病率高39.2%(95%CI 16.1至66.9),III/IV期疾病的发生率低10.2%(95%CI 21.3至2.4)。USS组在阶段上没有差异。1206名女性死于该疾病:296名(0.6%)MMS,291名(0.6%的)USS,619名(0.6%的)C组。与C组相比,MMS组(p=0.580)或USS组(p=0.360)的卵巢和输卵管癌症死亡率均无显著降低。MMS组对年度筛查事件的总体依从性为80.8%(345570/4420047),USS组为78.0%(327775/44200047)。对于在筛查期最后一次检测后一年内诊断出的卵巢癌和输卵管癌,MMS组的敏感性、特异性和阳性预测值分别为83.8%(95%CI 78.7-88.1)、99.8%(95%CI99.8-99.9)和28.8%(95%CI25.5-32.2),USS组分别为72.2%(95%CI65.9-78.0)、99.5%(95%CI99.5-99.5)和9.1%(95%CI7.8-10.5)。由于没有降低死亡率,因此没有进行最后的试验内成本效益分析。建立了一个纵向结果数据和超过50万份血清样本的生物源(UKCTOCS纵向女性队列),包括MMS组女性的连续年度样本,迄今已用于许多新的研究,主要集中在癌症的早期检测。危害:两种筛查测试(静脉穿刺和TVS)都与轻微并发症有关,并发症发生率较低(8.6/10万次MMS筛查;18.6/10万次USS筛查)。筛查本身不会引起焦虑,除非在异常筛查后需要更严格的重复检测。在MMS组中,对于每一种筛查出的卵巢或输卵管癌症,MMS组中又有2.3名女性(489例假阳性;212例癌症)进行了不必要的假阳性(良性附件病理或正常附件)手术。总的来说,每10000个筛查中有14个(489/345572个年度筛查)接受了不必要的手术。在USS组中,对于每一个筛查出的卵巢或输卵管癌症,另外10个(1630个假阳性;164个癌症)接受了不必要的假阳性手术。总的来说,每10000次筛查中有50名女性(1630/3327775次年度筛查)接受了不必要的手术。结论:不应使用这些策略对平均风险女性进行卵巢和输卵管癌症的人群筛查。多模式筛查期间III/IV期癌症发病率的降低并不能转化为死亡率的降低。研究人员应谨慎使用早期阶段作为筛选试验的替代结果。
{"title":"Mortality impact, risks, and benefits of general population screening for ovarian cancer: the UKCTOCS randomised controlled trial.","authors":"Usha Menon, Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj, Matthew Burnell, Andy Ryan, Jatinderpal K Kalsi, Naveena Singh, Anne Dawnay, Lesley Fallowfield, Alistair J McGuire, Stuart Campbell, Steven J Skates, Mahesh Parmar, Ian J Jacobs","doi":"10.3310/BHBR5832","DOIUrl":"10.3310/BHBR5832","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ovarian and tubal cancers are lethal gynaecological cancers, with over 50% of the patients diagnosed at advanced stage.</p><p><strong>Trial design: </strong>Randomised controlled trial involving 27 primary care trusts adjacent to 13 trial centres based at NHS Trusts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Postmenopausal average-risk women, aged 50-74, with intact ovaries and no previous ovarian or current non-ovarian cancer.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>One of two annual screening strategies: (1) multimodal screening (MMS) using a longitudinal CA125 algorithm with repeat CA125 testing and transvaginal scan (TVS) as second line test (2) ultrasound screening (USS) using TVS alone with repeat scan to confirm any abnormality. The control (C) group had no screening. Follow-up was through linkage to national registries, postal follow-up questionnaires and direct communication with trial centres and participants.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess comprehensively risks and benefits of ovarian cancer screening in the general population.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Primary outcome was death due to ovarian or tubal cancer as assigned by an independent outcomes review committee. Secondary outcomes included incidence and stage at diagnosis of ovarian and tubal cancer, compliance, performance characteristics, harms and cost-effectiveness of the two screening strategies and a bioresource for future research.</p><p><strong>Randomisation: </strong>The trial management system confirmed eligibility and randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to MMS, USS and C groups in a 1:1:2 ratio.</p><p><strong>Blinding: </strong>Investigators and participants were unblinded and outcomes review committee was masked to randomisation group.</p><p><strong>Analyses: </strong>Primary analyses were by intention to screen, comparing separately MMS and USS with C using the Versatile test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1,243,282 women were invited and 205,090 attended for recruitment between April 2001 and September 2005.</p><p><strong>Randomised: </strong>202,638 women: 50,640 MMS, 50,639 USS and 101,359 C group.</p><p><strong>Numbers analysed for primary outcome: </strong>202,562 (>99.9%): 50,625 (>99.9%) MMS, 50,623 (>99.9%) USS, and 101,314 (>99.9%) C group.</p><p><strong>Outcome: </strong>Women in MMS and USS groups underwent 345,570 and 327,775 annual screens between randomisation and 31 December 2011. At median follow-up of 16.3 (IQR 15.1-17.3) years, 2055 women developed ovarian or tubal cancer: 522 (1.0% of 50,625) MMS, 517 (1.0% of 50,623) USS, and 1016 (1.0% of 101314) in C group. Compared to the C group, in the MMS group, the incidence of Stage I/II disease was 39.2% (95% CI 16.1 to 66.9) higher and stage III/IV 10.2% (95% CI -21.3 to 2.4) lower. There was no difference in stage in the USS group. 1206 women died of the disease: 296 (0.6%) MMS, 291 (0.6%) US","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-93"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542866/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9455506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Technology-enabled CONTACT tracing in care homes in the COVID-19 pandemic: the CONTACT non-randomised mixed-methods feasibility study. COVID-19大流行期间护养院里技术支持的接触者追踪:CONTACT非随机混合方法可行性研究
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/UHDN6497
Carl A Thompson, Thomas A Willis, Amanda Farrin, Adam Gordon, Amrit Daffu-O'Reilly, Catherine Noakes, Kishwer Khaliq, Andrew Kemp, Tom Hall, Chris Bojke, Karen Spilsbury

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 devastated lives in care homes for older people, where residents faced higher mortality risks than the general population. Infection prevention and control decisions were critical to protect these vulnerable residents. Infection prevention and control measures like 'lockdowns' had their own risks, such as social isolation, alongside assumed benefits. A key non-pharmaceutical intervention for managing infections is contact tracing. Traditional contact tracing, which relies on recalling contacts, is not feasible in care homes where approximately 70% of residents have cognitive impairments. The CONtact TrAcing in Care homes using digital Technology intervention introduces Bluetooth-enabled wearable devices for automated contact tracing. We provided structured reports (scheduled regularly and in reaction to positive COVID-19 cases) on contact patterns to homes to support better-informed infection prevention and control decisions and potentially reduce blanket restrictive measures. We also partnered with the PROTECT COVID-19 research team to examine air quality in two of our homes.

Methods: CONTACT was a non-randomised mixed-method feasibility study in four English care homes. Recruitment was via care home research networks, with individual consent. Data collection included routine device data, case report forms, qualitative interviews, field observations of care home activity and an adapted Normalisation Measure Development questionnaire survey to explore implementation using normalisation process theory. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistical methods, and qualitative data were thematically analysed using normalisation process theory. Intervention and study delivery were evaluated against predefined progression criteria.

Results: Of 156 eligible residents, 105 agreed to wear a device, with 102 (97%) starting the intervention. Of 225 eligible staff, 82.4% (n = 178) participated. Over 2 months, device loss and battery failure were significant: residents lost 11% of devices, with half replaced. Staff lost fewer devices, just 6.5%, but < 10% were replaced. Fob wearables needed more battery changes than card-type devices (15% vs. 0%). Homes variably understood structured and reactive feedback but were unlikely to act on it. Researcher support for interpreting reports was valued. Homes found information useful when it confirmed rather than challenged preconceived contact patterns. Staff privacy concerns were a barrier to adoption. Study procedures added to existing work, making participation burdensome. The perceived burden of participation, amplified by the pandemic context, outweighed the benefits. CONTACT did not meet its quantitative or qualitative progression criteria.

Limitations: Researchers had to pragmatically adapt procedures, resulting in suboptimal implementation choices from an implementati

背景:2019年冠状病毒病摧毁了老年人护理院的生活,老年人面临的死亡风险高于一般人群。感染预防和控制决策对于保护这些弱势居民至关重要。像“封锁”这样的感染防控措施有其自身的风险,比如社会隔离,以及假定的好处。管理感染的一项关键非药物干预措施是接触者追踪。传统的接触者追踪依赖于召回接触者,在大约70%的居民有认知障碍的护理院是不可行的。使用数字技术干预的护理院接触追踪引入了蓝牙可穿戴设备,用于自动接触追踪。我们向家庭提供了有关接触模式的结构化报告(定期安排并针对COVID-19阳性病例),以支持更明智的感染预防和控制决策,并可能减少一揽子限制性措施。我们还与PROTECT COVID-19研究小组合作,检查了我们两个家庭的空气质量。方法:CONTACT是一项在四家英国养老院进行的非随机混合方法可行性研究。招募是在个人同意的情况下通过养老院研究网络进行的。数据收集包括常规设备数据、病例报告表、定性访谈、护理院活动的实地观察和一项适应的规范化测量发展问卷调查,以探索使用规范化过程理论的实施情况。定量数据采用描述性统计方法进行分析,定性数据采用归一化过程理论进行主题分析。根据预先设定的进展标准对干预和研究交付进行评估。结果:在156名符合条件的居民中,105人同意佩戴设备,102人(97%)开始干预。在225名符合条件的员工中,82.4% (n = 178)参与了调查。在2个月的时间里,设备丢失和电池故障非常严重:居民丢失了11%的设备,其中一半被更换。工作人员丢失的设备较少,仅为6.5%,但局限性:研究人员必须务实地调整程序,从实施科学的角度来看,这导致了次优实施选择。未来的研究应该与家庭共同设计干预措施,关注实施和可穿戴性以及技术有效性。结论:对养老院来说,CONTACT的最终试验是不可行的,也不可接受的,部分原因是大流行背景的变化和对家庭的需求。通过更有效的实施,蓝牙可穿戴系统作为家庭“物联网”的一部分可用于:(1)更好地了解空气传播风险,通风和空气质量;(2)使护理质量和居民生活质量的重要相关方面更加透明。未来工作:我们将继续探索蓝牙可穿戴设备的可能性,与学术和护理合作伙伴一起模拟社交网络、运动、感染风险和养老院的质量。资助:本摘要介绍了由国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估计划资助的独立研究,奖励号为NIHR132197。
{"title":"Technology-enabled CONTACT tracing in care homes in the COVID-19 pandemic: the CONTACT non-randomised mixed-methods feasibility study.","authors":"Carl A Thompson, Thomas A Willis, Amanda Farrin, Adam Gordon, Amrit Daffu-O'Reilly, Catherine Noakes, Kishwer Khaliq, Andrew Kemp, Tom Hall, Chris Bojke, Karen Spilsbury","doi":"10.3310/UHDN6497","DOIUrl":"10.3310/UHDN6497","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coronavirus disease 2019 devastated lives in care homes for older people, where residents faced higher mortality risks than the general population. Infection prevention and control decisions were critical to protect these vulnerable residents. Infection prevention and control measures like 'lockdowns' had their own risks, such as social isolation, alongside assumed benefits. A key non-pharmaceutical intervention for managing infections is contact tracing. Traditional contact tracing, which relies on recalling contacts, is not feasible in care homes where approximately 70% of residents have cognitive impairments. The CONtact TrAcing in Care homes using digital Technology intervention introduces Bluetooth-enabled wearable devices for automated contact tracing. We provided structured reports (scheduled regularly and in reaction to positive COVID-19 cases) on contact patterns to homes to support better-informed infection prevention and control decisions and potentially reduce blanket restrictive measures. We also partnered with the PROTECT COVID-19 research team to examine air quality in two of our homes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CONTACT was a non-randomised mixed-method feasibility study in four English care homes. Recruitment was via care home research networks, with individual consent. Data collection included routine device data, case report forms, qualitative interviews, field observations of care home activity and an adapted Normalisation Measure Development questionnaire survey to explore implementation using normalisation process theory. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistical methods, and qualitative data were thematically analysed using normalisation process theory. Intervention and study delivery were evaluated against predefined progression criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 156 eligible residents, 105 agreed to wear a device, with 102 (97%) starting the intervention. Of 225 eligible staff, 82.4% (<i>n</i> = 178) participated. Over 2 months, device loss and battery failure were significant: residents lost 11% of devices, with half replaced. Staff lost fewer devices, just 6.5%, but < 10% were replaced. Fob wearables needed more battery changes than card-type devices (15% vs. 0%). Homes variably understood structured and reactive feedback but were unlikely to act on it. Researcher support for interpreting reports was valued. Homes found information useful when it confirmed rather than challenged preconceived contact patterns. Staff privacy concerns were a barrier to adoption. Study procedures added to existing work, making participation burdensome. The perceived burden of participation, amplified by the pandemic context, outweighed the benefits. CONTACT did not meet its quantitative or qualitative progression criteria.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Researchers had to pragmatically adapt procedures, resulting in suboptimal implementation choices from an implementati","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12278376/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144019687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Effectiveness of biomarker-guided duration of antibiotic treatment in children hospitalised with confirmed or suspected bacterial infection: the BATCH RCT. 生物标志物引导的抗生素治疗持续时间对确诊或疑似细菌感染住院儿童的有效性:BATCH随机对照试验
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/MBVA3675
Cherry-Ann Waldron, Philip Pallmann, Simon Schoenbuchner, Debbie Harris, Lucy Brookes-Howell, Céu Mateus, Jolanta Bernatoniene, Katrina Cathie, Saul N Faust, Josie Henley, Lucy Hinds, Kerry Hood, Chao Huang, Sarah Jones, Sarah Kotecha, Sarah Milosevic, Helen Nabwera, Sanjay Patel, Stéphane Paulus, Colin Ve Powell, Jenny Preston, Huasheng Xiang, Emma Thomas-Jones, Enitan D Carrol

Background: Procalcitonin is a biomarker specific for bacterial infection, with a more rapid response than other commonly used biomarkers, such as C-reactive protein, but it is not routinely used in the National Health Service.

Objective: To determine if using a procalcitonin-guided algorithm may safely reduce duration of antibiotic therapy compared to standard of care in hospitalised children with suspected or confirmed infection.

Design: A pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel two-arm, individually randomised controlled trial with internal pilot phase, qualitative study and health economic evaluations.

Setting: Paediatric wards or paediatric intensive care units within children's hospitals (n = 6) and district general hospitals (n = 9) in the United Kingdom.

Participants: Children aged between 72 hours and 18 years admitted to hospital and being treated with intravenous antibiotics for suspected or confirmed bacterial infection.

Interventions: Procalcitonin-guided algorithm versus usual standard care alone.

Main outcome measures: Coprimary outcomes were duration of intravenous antibiotic use and a composite safety measure.

Results: Between 11 June 2018 and 12 October 2022, 1949 children were recruited: 977 to the procalcitonin group [427 female (43.7%), 550 male (56.3%)], and 972 to the usual care group [478 female (49.2%), 494 male (50.8%)]. Duration of intravenous antibiotics was not significantly different between the procalcitonin group (median 96.0 hours) and the usual care group (median 99.7 hours) [hazard ratio = 0.96 (0.87, 1.05)], and the procalcitonin-guided algorithm was non-inferior to usual care [risk difference = -0.81% (95% confidence interval upper bound 1.11%)]. At clinical review, a procalcitonin result was available for 81.8% of the time, which was considered as part of clinical decision-making 66.6% of the time, and the algorithm was adhered to 57.2% of the time. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per duration of intravenous antibiotics hour avoided from bootstrapped samples was £467.62 per intravenous antibiotic hour avoided. Cost analysis of complete cases was also higher in the procalcitonin arm for all age groups, and for children aged 5 years and over. The intervention is not cost-effective as it is more expensive with no significant improvement in intravenous antibiotic duration.

Limitations: Robust antimicrobial stewardship programmes were already implemented in the lead recruiting sites, and adherence to the algorithm was poor. Clinicians may be reluctant to adhere to biomarker-guided algorithms, due to unfamiliarity with interpreting the test result.

Conclusions: In children hospitalised with confirmed or suspected bacterial infection, the addition of a procalcitonin-gui

背景:降钙素原是细菌感染特异性的生物标志物,比其他常用的生物标志物(如c反应蛋白)反应更快,但在国民健康服务中并未常规使用。目的:确定与标准护理相比,在疑似或确诊感染的住院儿童中,使用降钙素原引导算法是否可以安全地减少抗生素治疗的持续时间。设计:一项实用的、多中心、开放标签、平行双臂、单独随机对照试验,包括内部试验阶段、定性研究和健康经济评估。环境:联合王国儿童医院(n = 6)和地区综合医院(n = 9)的儿科病房或儿科重症监护室。参与者:年龄在72小时至18岁之间,因怀疑或确认细菌感染而入院并接受静脉注射抗生素治疗的儿童。干预措施:降钙素原引导的算法与单独的常规标准治疗。主要结局指标:主要结局指标为静脉注射抗生素使用时间和复合安全性指标。结果:在2018年6月11日至2022年10月12日期间,招募了1949名儿童:降钙素原组977名[女性427名(43.7%),男性550名(56.3%)],常规护理组972名[女性478名(49.2%),男性494名(50.8%)]。静脉使用抗生素时间降钙素原组(中位数96.0小时)与常规护理组(中位数99.7小时)无显著差异[风险比= 0.96(0.87,1.05)],降钙素原引导算法不低于常规护理[风险差= -0.81%(95%置信区间上界1.11%)]。在临床审查中,有81.8%的时间获得降钙素原结果,有66.6%的时间将其视为临床决策的一部分,有57.2%的时间遵守该算法。自举样本每避免静脉注射抗生素小时持续时间的增量成本-效果比为每避免静脉注射抗生素小时467.62英镑。所有年龄组和5岁及以上儿童的降钙素原组完整病例的成本分析也较高。这种干预不具有成本效益,因为它更昂贵,而且静脉注射抗生素持续时间没有显著改善。局限性:在主要招募地点已经实施了强有力的抗菌药物管理规划,并且对算法的遵守程度较差。由于不熟悉测试结果的解释,临床医生可能不愿意坚持生物标志物引导的算法。结论:在确诊或疑似细菌感染的住院儿童中,在常规护理中添加降钙素原引导算法在安全性方面不差,但不会缩短静脉注射抗生素的持续时间,并且不具有成本效益。在存在强有力的抗菌素管理规划以减少抗生素使用的情况下,降钙素原引导算法可能提供很少的附加价值。未来的工作:未来的试验必须包括一个实施框架,以提高试验干预的保真度,以及重复的教育和培训周期,以促进生物标志物引导算法在常规临床护理中的实施。试验注册:该试验注册号为ISRCTN11369832。资助:该奖项由美国国立卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目(NIHR奖励编号:15/188/42)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上;第29卷第16期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"Effectiveness of biomarker-guided duration of antibiotic treatment in children hospitalised with confirmed or suspected bacterial infection: the BATCH RCT.","authors":"Cherry-Ann Waldron, Philip Pallmann, Simon Schoenbuchner, Debbie Harris, Lucy Brookes-Howell, Céu Mateus, Jolanta Bernatoniene, Katrina Cathie, Saul N Faust, Josie Henley, Lucy Hinds, Kerry Hood, Chao Huang, Sarah Jones, Sarah Kotecha, Sarah Milosevic, Helen Nabwera, Sanjay Patel, Stéphane Paulus, Colin Ve Powell, Jenny Preston, Huasheng Xiang, Emma Thomas-Jones, Enitan D Carrol","doi":"10.3310/MBVA3675","DOIUrl":"10.3310/MBVA3675","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Procalcitonin is a biomarker specific for bacterial infection, with a more rapid response than other commonly used biomarkers, such as C-reactive protein, but it is not routinely used in the National Health Service.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine if using a procalcitonin-guided algorithm may safely reduce duration of antibiotic therapy compared to standard of care in hospitalised children with suspected or confirmed infection.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, parallel two-arm, individually randomised controlled trial with internal pilot phase, qualitative study and health economic evaluations.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Paediatric wards or paediatric intensive care units within children's hospitals (<i>n</i> = 6) and district general hospitals (<i>n</i> = 9) in the United Kingdom.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Children aged between 72 hours and 18 years admitted to hospital and being treated with intravenous antibiotics for suspected or confirmed bacterial infection.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Procalcitonin-guided algorithm versus usual standard care alone.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Coprimary outcomes were duration of intravenous antibiotic use and a composite safety measure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 11 June 2018 and 12 October 2022, 1949 children were recruited: 977 to the procalcitonin group [427 female (43.7%), 550 male (56.3%)], and 972 to the usual care group [478 female (49.2%), 494 male (50.8%)]. Duration of intravenous antibiotics was not significantly different between the procalcitonin group (median 96.0 hours) and the usual care group (median 99.7 hours) [hazard ratio = 0.96 (0.87, 1.05)], and the procalcitonin-guided algorithm was non-inferior to usual care [risk difference = -0.81% (95% confidence interval upper bound 1.11%)]. At clinical review, a procalcitonin result was available for 81.8% of the time, which was considered as part of clinical decision-making 66.6% of the time, and the algorithm was adhered to 57.2% of the time. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per duration of intravenous antibiotics hour avoided from bootstrapped samples was £467.62 per intravenous antibiotic hour avoided. Cost analysis of complete cases was also higher in the procalcitonin arm for all age groups, and for children aged 5 years and over. The intervention is not cost-effective as it is more expensive with no significant improvement in intravenous antibiotic duration.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Robust antimicrobial stewardship programmes were already implemented in the lead recruiting sites, and adherence to the algorithm was poor. Clinicians may be reluctant to adhere to biomarker-guided algorithms, due to unfamiliarity with interpreting the test result.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In children hospitalised with confirmed or suspected bacterial infection, the addition of a procalcitonin-gui","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 16","pages":"1-125"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12107608/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144093427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
High-flow nasal cannula therapy versus continuous positive airway pressure for non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric critical care: the FIRST-ABC RCTs. 高流量鼻插管治疗与持续气道正压通气在儿科重症监护中的无创呼吸支持:FIRST-ABC随机对照试验
IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-05-01 DOI: 10.3310/PDBG1495
Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Alvin Richards-Belle, Karen Thomas, Laura Drikite, Zia Sadique, Silvia Moler Zapata, Robert Darnell, Carly Au, Peter J Davis, Izabella Orzechowska, Julie Lester, Kevin Morris, Millie Parke, Mark Peters, Sam Peters, Michelle Saull, Lyvonne Tume, Richard G Feltbower, Richard Grieve, Paul R Mouncey, David Harrison, Kathryn Rowan
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the increasing use of non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric intensive care units, there are no large randomised controlled trials comparing two commonly used non-invasive respiratory support modes, continuous positive airway pressure and high-flow nasal cannula therapy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the non-inferiority of high-flow nasal cannula, compared with continuous positive airway pressure, when used as the first-line mode of non-invasive respiratory support in acutely ill children and following extubation, on time to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which the child was free of respiratory support (non-invasive and invasive).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A master protocol comprising two pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, non-inferiority randomised controlled trials (step-up and step-down) with shared infrastructure, including internal pilot and integrated health economic evaluation.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Twenty-five National Health Service paediatric critical care units (paediatric intensive care units and/or high-dependency units) across England, Wales and Scotland.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Critically ill children assessed by the treating clinician to require non-invasive respiratory support for (1) acute illness (step-up randomised controlled trial) or (2) within 72 hours of extubation (step-down randomised controlled trial).</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>High-flow nasal cannula delivered at a flow rate based on patient weight (Intervention) compared to continuous positive airway pressure of 7-8 cm H<sub>2</sub>O pressure (Control).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary clinical outcome was time to liberation from respiratory support. The primary cost-effectiveness outcome was 180-day incremental net monetary benefit. Secondary outcomes included mortality at paediatric intensive care unit/high-dependency unit discharge, day 60 and day 180; (re)intubation rate at 48 hours; duration of paediatric intensive care unit/high-dependency unit and hospital stay; patient comfort; sedation use; parental stress; and health-related quality of life at 180 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the step-up randomised controlled trial, out of 600 children randomised, 573 were included in the primary analysis (median age 9 months). Median time to liberation was 52.9 hours for high-flow nasal cannula (95% confidence interval 46.0 to 60.9 hours) and 47.9 hours (95% confidence interval 40.5 to 55.7 hours) for continuous positive airway pressure (adjusted hazard ratio 1.03, one-sided 97.5% confidence interval 0.86 to ∞). The high-flow nasal cannula group had lower use of sedation (27.7% vs. 37%) and mean duration of acute hospital stay (13.8 days vs. 19.5 days). In the step-down randomised controlled trial, of the 600 children randomised, 553 were included in the primary analysis (media
背景:尽管无创呼吸支持在儿科重症监护病房的使用越来越多,但目前还没有大型随机对照试验比较两种常用的无创呼吸支持模式,持续气道正压通气和高流量鼻插管治疗。目的:评价高流量鼻插管与持续气道正压通气相比,作为急性患儿无创呼吸支持一线模式,拔管后及时脱离呼吸支持的非低效性,定义为患儿无呼吸支持(无创和有创)48小时的开始时间。设计:主方案包括两个实用的、多中心、平行组、非劣效性随机对照试验(增加和减少),具有共享的基础设施,包括内部试点和综合卫生经济评估。环境:英格兰、威尔士和苏格兰共有25个国家卫生服务儿科重症监护病房(儿科重症监护病房和/或高度依赖病房)。受试者:由治疗临床医生评估需要无创呼吸支持的危重儿童(1)急性疾病(递增随机对照试验)或(2)拔管后72小时内(递减随机对照试验)。干预措施:以基于患者体重的流速输送高流量鼻插管(干预),与持续气道正压7-8 cm水压(对照组)相比。主要观察指标:主要临床观察指标为呼吸支持解除时间。主要的成本效益结果是180天的增量净货币效益。次要结局包括儿童重症监护室/高依赖病房出院时的死亡率,第60天和第180天;(2) 48小时插管率;儿科加护病房/高度依赖病房和住院时间;病人舒适;镇静使用;父母的压力;以及180天的健康相关生活质量。结果:在随机对照试验中,600名儿童中,573名被纳入主要分析(中位年龄9个月)。高流量鼻插管组至解放的中位时间为52.9小时(95%可信区间46.0 ~ 60.9小时),持续气道正压组至解放的中位时间为47.9小时(95%可信区间40.5 ~ 55.7小时)(校正风险比1.03,单侧97.5%可信区间0.86 ~∞)。高流量鼻插管组镇静用量较低(27.7%对37%),平均急性住院时间较低(13.8天对19.5天)。在降压随机对照试验中,600名随机儿童中,553名被纳入主要分析(中位年龄3个月)。高流量鼻插管的中位解放时间为50.5小时(95%可信区间为43.0至67.9),而持续气道正压通气的中位解放时间为42.9小时(95%可信区间为30.5至48.2)(校正风险比0.83,单侧97.5%可信区间0.70至∞)。高流量鼻插管组第180天的死亡率明显更高[5.6% vs.持续气道正压组2.4%,校正优势比为3.07(95%可信区间1.1 - 8.8)]。局限性:干预是非盲法的。一组不同诊断和疾病严重程度的儿童被纳入研究。结论:在需要无创呼吸支持的急症患儿中,与持续气道正压通气相比,高流量鼻插管在脱离呼吸支持的时间上符合非劣效性标准,而在拔管后需要无创呼吸支持的危重症患儿中,无法证明高流量鼻插管的非劣效性。今后的工作:(1)确定治疗失败的危险因素。(2)比较拔管后无创呼吸支持与标准护理的协议化方法。(3)探索评估治疗效果异质性的替代方法。(4)在降压随机对照试验中,探讨高流量鼻插管组死亡率升高的原因。研究注册:当前对照试验ISRCTN60048867。资助:该奖项由美国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目(NIHR奖励编号:17/94/28)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上;第29卷第9期有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
{"title":"High-flow nasal cannula therapy versus continuous positive airway pressure for non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric critical care: the FIRST-ABC RCTs.","authors":"Padmanabhan Ramnarayan, Alvin Richards-Belle, Karen Thomas, Laura Drikite, Zia Sadique, Silvia Moler Zapata, Robert Darnell, Carly Au, Peter J Davis, Izabella Orzechowska, Julie Lester, Kevin Morris, Millie Parke, Mark Peters, Sam Peters, Michelle Saull, Lyvonne Tume, Richard G Feltbower, Richard Grieve, Paul R Mouncey, David Harrison, Kathryn Rowan","doi":"10.3310/PDBG1495","DOIUrl":"10.3310/PDBG1495","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Despite the increasing use of non-invasive respiratory support in paediatric intensive care units, there are no large randomised controlled trials comparing two commonly used non-invasive respiratory support modes, continuous positive airway pressure and high-flow nasal cannula therapy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objective: &lt;/strong&gt;To evaluate the non-inferiority of high-flow nasal cannula, compared with continuous positive airway pressure, when used as the first-line mode of non-invasive respiratory support in acutely ill children and following extubation, on time to liberation from respiratory support, defined as the start of a 48-hour period during which the child was free of respiratory support (non-invasive and invasive).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Design: &lt;/strong&gt;A master protocol comprising two pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, non-inferiority randomised controlled trials (step-up and step-down) with shared infrastructure, including internal pilot and integrated health economic evaluation.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Setting: &lt;/strong&gt;Twenty-five National Health Service paediatric critical care units (paediatric intensive care units and/or high-dependency units) across England, Wales and Scotland.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Participants: &lt;/strong&gt;Critically ill children assessed by the treating clinician to require non-invasive respiratory support for (1) acute illness (step-up randomised controlled trial) or (2) within 72 hours of extubation (step-down randomised controlled trial).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Interventions: &lt;/strong&gt;High-flow nasal cannula delivered at a flow rate based on patient weight (Intervention) compared to continuous positive airway pressure of 7-8 cm H&lt;sub&gt;2&lt;/sub&gt;O pressure (Control).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Main outcome measures: &lt;/strong&gt;The primary clinical outcome was time to liberation from respiratory support. The primary cost-effectiveness outcome was 180-day incremental net monetary benefit. Secondary outcomes included mortality at paediatric intensive care unit/high-dependency unit discharge, day 60 and day 180; (re)intubation rate at 48 hours; duration of paediatric intensive care unit/high-dependency unit and hospital stay; patient comfort; sedation use; parental stress; and health-related quality of life at 180 days.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;In the step-up randomised controlled trial, out of 600 children randomised, 573 were included in the primary analysis (median age 9 months). Median time to liberation was 52.9 hours for high-flow nasal cannula (95% confidence interval 46.0 to 60.9 hours) and 47.9 hours (95% confidence interval 40.5 to 55.7 hours) for continuous positive airway pressure (adjusted hazard ratio 1.03, one-sided 97.5% confidence interval 0.86 to ∞). The high-flow nasal cannula group had lower use of sedation (27.7% vs. 37%) and mean duration of acute hospital stay (13.8 days vs. 19.5 days). In the step-down randomised controlled trial, of the 600 children randomised, 553 were included in the primary analysis (media","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 9","pages":"1-96"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12067162/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144011767","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
A network approach to addressing the needs of patients with incurable head and neck cancer and their families. 解决无法治愈的头颈癌患者及其家属需求的网络方法。
IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Pub Date : 2025-04-30 DOI: 10.3310/TKLD6486
Joanne M Patterson, Catriona R Mayland, Peter Bath, Michelle Lawton, Valerie Bryant, David Hamilton, Madina Hasan, Tony Stone, Richard Campbell, Annabel Crum, Linda Sharp
<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with incurable head and neck cancer have considerable unmet needs and complex symptom burden, with evidence of substantial geographical and/or socioeconomic inequalities. Accurate information on healthcare needs, resource utilisation and service provision in the last year of life is lacking. This places limits on service delivery planning and the development and testing of interventions to better meet needs. Our partnership spans three regions, which nationally have some of the highest rates of incurable head and neck cancer.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The overall aims were to (1) establish a palliative head and neck cancer partnership, (2) identify and evaluate routine incurable head and neck cancer data sources and utilise these to develop and address research priorities.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>O1. Develop a palliative head and neck cancer network within the North of England, representing a geographical area with high incidence of incurable head and neck cancer and palliative care needs. O2. Develop and refine research questions and priorities. O3. Engage with data providers to identify relevant data sets and specific data fields to understand the potential quality and utility of these to inform research priorities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>There were three interconnected work packages: WP1: A 'snowballing' approach to establish a network of clinicians, researchers, patient and public representatives, data architects and key stakeholders with an interest in head and neck cancer palliative care. WP2: A Delphi consensus process to develop and refine research questions and priorities, based on national guidance and systematic reviews of evidence gaps. WP3: Identification of national and local data sets and exploration of the potential data quality and utility, and associated information governance processes for access.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>WP1: A diverse network was established, encompassing members from a wide range of professions and patient/carer groups. WP2: The Delphi consisted of two rounds involving up to 66 participants. Consensus was reached on 12 research questions representing 4 key areas of prioritisation: service provision, symptom management, psychosocial support and information provision and communication. WP3: A range of national and local data sources were identified as having the potential to address the research priorities. A directory of data sources was developed. Working in an iterative way, data sets and relevant data fields were mapped to the 12 potential research priority areas to assess the applicability of using routine data to address these priorities.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Approximately, one-third of participants in the Delphi process dropped out in round 2. Despite attempts to be flexible in our approach, retaining participants, particularly for patients and their families on a palliative care pathway, is challenging.</p><p><strong>
背景:无法治愈的头颈癌患者有大量未满足的需求和复杂的症状负担,有证据表明存在严重的地理和/或社会经济不平等。缺乏关于生命最后一年的保健需求、资源利用和服务提供的准确信息。这限制了提供服务的规划以及为更好地满足需求而制定和测试干预措施。我们的合作横跨三个地区,这三个地区是全国头颈癌发病率最高的地区。目的:总体目标是:(1)建立姑息性头颈癌合作伙伴关系,(2)确定和评估常规无法治愈的头颈癌数据来源,并利用这些数据来制定和解决研究重点。目的:O1群。在英格兰北部建立一个缓解头颈癌的网络,代表一个无法治愈的头颈癌高发和缓解治疗需求的地理区域。O2。发展和完善研究问题和优先事项。O3。与数据提供者合作,确定相关的数据集和特定的数据领域,了解这些数据的潜在质量和效用,从而为研究重点提供信息。方法:有三个相互关联的工作包:WP1:“滚雪球”方法,建立一个由临床医生、研究人员、患者和公众代表、数据架构师和对头颈癌姑息治疗感兴趣的关键利益相关者组成的网络。WP2:德尔菲共识程序,以国家指导和对证据差距的系统审查为基础,制定和完善研究问题和重点。WP3:确定国家和地方数据集,探索潜在的数据质量和效用,以及相关的信息治理流程。结果:WP1:建立了一个多元化的网络,包括来自广泛专业和患者/护理群体的成员。WP2:德尔菲包括两轮,共有66名参与者。就代表4个重点领域的12个研究问题达成了共识:服务提供、症状管理、社会心理支持以及信息提供和沟通。WP3:确定了具有解决研究重点的潜力的一系列国家和地方数据来源。编制了一个数据源目录。以迭代的方式工作,将数据集和相关数据字段映射到12个潜在的研究优先领域,以评估使用常规数据来解决这些优先领域的适用性。限制:大约三分之一的德尔菲过程参与者在第二轮中退出。尽管我们的方法尝试灵活,但留住参与者,特别是对姑息治疗途径的患者及其家属来说,是一项挑战。未来工作:已建立的网络和共识练习构成了未来服务评估和合作研究的基础。这些将基于患者、其家属和一系列其他利益攸关方商定的差距和优先事项。结论:该网络建立了一个跨部门合作,以改善无法治愈的头颈癌,并确定了12个研究重点领域的平台。利用常规数据来处理这些优先事项仍然是一个具有挑战性的领域,需要一系列方法学研究方法来推进这一工作。资助:本文介绍了由国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估计划资助的独立研究,奖励号为NIHR135361。
{"title":"A network approach to addressing the needs of patients with incurable head and neck cancer and their families.","authors":"Joanne M Patterson, Catriona R Mayland, Peter Bath, Michelle Lawton, Valerie Bryant, David Hamilton, Madina Hasan, Tony Stone, Richard Campbell, Annabel Crum, Linda Sharp","doi":"10.3310/TKLD6486","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3310/TKLD6486","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;Patients with incurable head and neck cancer have considerable unmet needs and complex symptom burden, with evidence of substantial geographical and/or socioeconomic inequalities. Accurate information on healthcare needs, resource utilisation and service provision in the last year of life is lacking. This places limits on service delivery planning and the development and testing of interventions to better meet needs. Our partnership spans three regions, which nationally have some of the highest rates of incurable head and neck cancer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Aims: &lt;/strong&gt;The overall aims were to (1) establish a palliative head and neck cancer partnership, (2) identify and evaluate routine incurable head and neck cancer data sources and utilise these to develop and address research priorities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Objectives: &lt;/strong&gt;O1. Develop a palliative head and neck cancer network within the North of England, representing a geographical area with high incidence of incurable head and neck cancer and palliative care needs. O2. Develop and refine research questions and priorities. O3. Engage with data providers to identify relevant data sets and specific data fields to understand the potential quality and utility of these to inform research priorities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods: &lt;/strong&gt;There were three interconnected work packages: WP1: A 'snowballing' approach to establish a network of clinicians, researchers, patient and public representatives, data architects and key stakeholders with an interest in head and neck cancer palliative care. WP2: A Delphi consensus process to develop and refine research questions and priorities, based on national guidance and systematic reviews of evidence gaps. WP3: Identification of national and local data sets and exploration of the potential data quality and utility, and associated information governance processes for access.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results: &lt;/strong&gt;WP1: A diverse network was established, encompassing members from a wide range of professions and patient/carer groups. WP2: The Delphi consisted of two rounds involving up to 66 participants. Consensus was reached on 12 research questions representing 4 key areas of prioritisation: service provision, symptom management, psychosocial support and information provision and communication. WP3: A range of national and local data sources were identified as having the potential to address the research priorities. A directory of data sources was developed. Working in an iterative way, data sets and relevant data fields were mapped to the 12 potential research priority areas to assess the applicability of using routine data to address these priorities.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Limitations: &lt;/strong&gt;Approximately, one-third of participants in the Delphi process dropped out in round 2. Despite attempts to be flexible in our approach, retaining participants, particularly for patients and their families on a palliative care pathway, is challenging.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":" ","pages":"1-29"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12067161/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144008744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Health technology assessment
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1