高血压试验中医生和患者的依从性:一个有待解决的重要问题的观点。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-05 DOI:10.1080/14737167.2024.2363401
Michel Burnier
{"title":"高血压试验中医生和患者的依从性:一个有待解决的重要问题的观点。","authors":"Michel Burnier","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2024.2363401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are important sources of evidence that strongly influence guidelines for patient management, including for elevated blood pressure in adults.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>Critical questions regarding the interpretation of hypertension trial results have recently increased, especially for concerns over methodology. In particular, investigator adherence to the protocol and patient adherence to investigational drugs are often far from optimal. These issues may be ignored or underreported because physicians' behavior during trials is often not monitored and patients' medication adherence is neither measured adequately nor reported or analyzed in the final report or in the publication. This situation may lead to misinterpretations of study results and misevaluations of the safety and efficacy profile of new drugs. In this short review, the problem of measuring, reporting, and analyzing drug adherence in RCTs is discussed and illustrated with several examples in the field of hypertension.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>The main conclusion is that drug adherence should always be measured in clinical trials, possibly with more than one method. In addition, prespecified analyses of adherence data should be included in the statistical plan of all trials to improve their overall quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician and patient adherence in hypertension trials: a point of view on an important issue to resolve.\",\"authors\":\"Michel Burnier\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2024.2363401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are important sources of evidence that strongly influence guidelines for patient management, including for elevated blood pressure in adults.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>Critical questions regarding the interpretation of hypertension trial results have recently increased, especially for concerns over methodology. In particular, investigator adherence to the protocol and patient adherence to investigational drugs are often far from optimal. These issues may be ignored or underreported because physicians' behavior during trials is often not monitored and patients' medication adherence is neither measured adequately nor reported or analyzed in the final report or in the publication. This situation may lead to misinterpretations of study results and misevaluations of the safety and efficacy profile of new drugs. In this short review, the problem of measuring, reporting, and analyzing drug adherence in RCTs is discussed and illustrated with several examples in the field of hypertension.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>The main conclusion is that drug adherence should always be measured in clinical trials, possibly with more than one method. In addition, prespecified analyses of adherence data should be included in the statistical plan of all trials to improve their overall quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2363401\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2363401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:随机对照试验(RCT)是重要的证据来源,对患者管理指南(包括成人高血压管理指南)有很大影响:最近,有关高血压试验结果解释的关键问题越来越多,尤其是对方法的关注。特别是,研究者对试验方案的遵守情况以及患者对试验药物的依从性往往远未达到最佳状态。这些问题可能会被忽视或少报,因为医生在试验过程中的行为往往不受监控,患者的用药依从性既没有得到充分测量,也没有在最终报告或出版物中报告或分析。这种情况可能会导致对研究结果的误读以及对新药安全性和疗效的错误评价。在这篇简短的综述中,讨论了在 RCT 中测量、报告和分析服药依从性的问题,并以高血压领域的几个实例进行了说明:主要结论是,在临床试验中应始终对用药依从性进行测量,可能时应采用一种以上的方法。此外,所有试验的统计计划中都应包括对依从性数据的预设分析,以提高试验的整体质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Physician and patient adherence in hypertension trials: a point of view on an important issue to resolve.

Introduction: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are important sources of evidence that strongly influence guidelines for patient management, including for elevated blood pressure in adults.

Areas covered: Critical questions regarding the interpretation of hypertension trial results have recently increased, especially for concerns over methodology. In particular, investigator adherence to the protocol and patient adherence to investigational drugs are often far from optimal. These issues may be ignored or underreported because physicians' behavior during trials is often not monitored and patients' medication adherence is neither measured adequately nor reported or analyzed in the final report or in the publication. This situation may lead to misinterpretations of study results and misevaluations of the safety and efficacy profile of new drugs. In this short review, the problem of measuring, reporting, and analyzing drug adherence in RCTs is discussed and illustrated with several examples in the field of hypertension.

Expert opinion: The main conclusion is that drug adherence should always be measured in clinical trials, possibly with more than one method. In addition, prespecified analyses of adherence data should be included in the statistical plan of all trials to improve their overall quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
期刊最新文献
Secondary healthcare resource utilization and related costs associated with influenza-related hospital admissions in adult patients, England 2016 - 2020. Costs for global guideline-based diagnosis of mucormycosis in patients with neutropenia, hematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplantation - a perspective of the German healthcare system. Content and cost of waste pharmaceuticals collected by pharmacies for disposal. Correction. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lorlatinib and crizotinib in the first-line treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
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
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
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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