-
Trials Jun 2024Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are rigorous scientific research designs for evaluating intervention effectiveness. However, implementing RCTs in a real-world...
Strengths, challenges, and strategies for implementing pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs): example of the Personalized Citizen Assistance for Social Participation (APIC) trial.
BACKGROUND
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are rigorous scientific research designs for evaluating intervention effectiveness. However, implementing RCTs in a real-world context is challenging. To develop strategies to improve its application, it is essential to understand the strengths and challenges of this design. This study thus aimed to explore the strengths, challenges, and strategies for improving the implementation of a pragmatic multicenter, prospective, two-arm RCT evaluating the effects of the Personalized Citizen Assistance for Social Participation (Accompagnement-citoyen Personnalisé d'Intégration Communautaire: APIC; weekly 3-h personalized stimulation sessions given by a trained volunteer over a 12-month period) on older adults' health, social participation, and life satisfaction.
METHODS
A multiple case study was conducted with 14 participants, comprising one research assistant, seven coordinators, and six managers of six community organizations serving older adults, who implemented the APIC in the context of a RCT. Between 2017 and 2023, qualitative data were extracted from 24 group meetings, seven semi-directed interviews, emails exchanged with the research team, and one follow-up document.
RESULTS
Aged between 30 and 60 (median ± SIQR: 44.0 ± 6.3), most participants were women from organizations already offering social participation interventions for older adults and working with the public sector. Reported strengths of this RCT were its relevance in assessing an innovative intervention to support healthy aging, and the sharing of common goals, expertise, and strategies with community organizations. Challenges included difficulties recruiting older adults, resistance to potential control group assignments, design complexity, and efforts to mobilize and engage volunteers. The COVID-19 pandemic lockdown and health measures exacerbated challenges related to recruiting older adults and mobilizing volunteers and complicated delivery of the intervention. The strategies that mostly overcame difficulties in recruiting older adults were reducing sample size, simplifying recruitment procedures, emphasizing the health follow-up, extending partnerships, and recognizing and supporting volunteers better. Because of the lockdown and physical distancing measures, the intervention was also adapted for remote delivery, including via telephone or videoconferencing.
CONCLUSION
Knowledge of the strengths and challenges of pragmatic RCTs can contribute to the development of strategies to facilitate implementation studies and better evaluate health and social participation interventions delivered under real-life conditions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
NCT03161860; Pre-results. Registered on May 22, 2017.
Topics: Humans; Social Participation; Female; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Adult; Volunteers; Research Design; COVID-19; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic; Aged; Personal Satisfaction; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 38937798
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08248-w -
Trials Jun 2024Treatment of displaced distal forearm fractures in children has traditionally been closed reduction and pin fixation, although they might heal and remodel without...
Is casting of displaced paediatric distal forearm fractures non-inferior to reduction under general anaesthesia? Study protocol for a pragmatic, randomized, controlled non-inferiority multicentre trial (the casting trial).
BACKGROUND
Treatment of displaced distal forearm fractures in children has traditionally been closed reduction and pin fixation, although they might heal and remodel without surgery with no functional impairment. No randomized controlled trials have been published comparing the patient-reported functional outcome following non-surgical or surgical treatment of displaced paediatric distal forearm fractures.
METHODS
A multicentre non-inferiority randomized controlled trial. Children aged 4-10 years with a displaced distal forearm fracture will be offered inclusion, if the on-duty orthopaedic surgeon finds indication for surgical intervention. They will be allocated equally to non-surgical treatment (intervention) or surgical treatment of surgeon's choice (comparator). Follow-up will be 4 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome is the between-group difference in 12 months QuickDASH score. We will need a sample of 40 patients to show a 15-point difference with 80% power.
DISCUSSION
The results of this trial may change our understanding of the healing potential of paediatric distal forearm fractures. If non-inferiority of non-surgical treatment is shown, the results may contribute to a reduction in future surgeries on children, who in turn can be treated without the risks and psychological burdens associated with surgery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
www.
CLINICALTRIALS
gov (ID: NCT05736068). Date of registry: 17 February 2023.
Topics: Humans; Child; Child, Preschool; Radius Fractures; Casts, Surgical; Treatment Outcome; Anesthesia, General; Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Ulna Fractures; Equivalence Trials as Topic; Female; Male; Time Factors; Fracture Healing; Fracture Fixation; Age Factors; Forearm Injuries; Recovery of Function; Wrist Fractures
PubMed: 38937792
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08253-z -
International Journal of Surgery... Jun 2024Although the benefits of post-operative rehabilitation in cancer surgery are well established, the role of prehabilitation is less defined. Oesophagogastric cancers...
The effect of a pre- and post- operative exercise program versus standard care on physical fitness of patients with oesophageal and gastric cancer undergoing neoadjuvant treatment prior to surgery (The PERIOP-OG Trial): a randomized controlled trial.
INTRODUCTION
Although the benefits of post-operative rehabilitation in cancer surgery are well established, the role of prehabilitation is less defined. Oesophagogastric cancers present a unique opportunity to study the impact of prehabilitation during the neoadjuvant window, whether with chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy (NCT) in patients who are frequently nutritionally depleted. This trial examines the impact of a community-based exercise program on patient fitness during and after the neoadjuvant window.
METHODS
A pragmatic, randomized controlled multi-centre trial was undertaken in three centres. Inclusion criteria were patients aged ≥ 18 years planned for NCT and esophagectomy or gastrectomy. Participants were randomized 1:1 to an exercise prehabilitation group (EX) or to usual care (UC). The primary endpoint was cardiorespiratory fitness between baseline and pre-surgery timepoint using the 6-min walk test. Secondary endpoints included hand dynamometer, 10-sec sit to stand, activity behaviour, body mass index, semi-structured interviews, questionnaires assessing quality of life, surgical fear, general self-efficacy and mastery.
RESULTS
Between March 2019 and December 2020, 71 participants were recruited: EX (n=36) or UC (n=35). From baseline to pre-surgery, the difference-in-difference for EX showed a significant improvement in 6MWT of 50.7m (P=0.05) compared to UC [mean (SD): 522.1m (+/-104.3) to 582.1m (+/-108) vs. 497.5m (+/-106.3) to 506.0 m (+/-140.4). There was no statistically significant DID for secondary outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS
This community exercise prehabilitation program significantly improves physical fitness for surgery, is feasible and provides a standardized framework for prescription of exercise in esophagogastric cancer patients undergoing NCT.
PubMed: 38935085
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001663 -
European Journal of Heart Failure Jun 2024Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) multimorbidity is prevalent among individuals with heart failure (HF), but whether cardiac structure and function, clinical...
Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic overlap in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: Cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and response to sacubitril/valsartan in PARAGON-HF.
AIMS
Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic (CKM) multimorbidity is prevalent among individuals with heart failure (HF), but whether cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and treatment response to sacubitril/valsartan vary in relation to CKM status is unknown.
METHODS AND RESULTS
In this PARAGON-HF post-hoc analysis, we evaluated the impact of CKM multimorbidity (atherosclerotic cardiovascular [CV] disease, chronic kidney disease, and type 2 diabetes) on cardiac structure and function, clinical outcomes, and treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan versus valsartan. The primary outcome was a composite of total HF hospitalizations and CV death. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome and a composite kidney outcome (sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate reduction of ≥50%, end-stage kidney disease, or kidney-related death). At baseline, 35.2% had one CKM condition, 33.3% had two, 15.9% had three, and only 15.6% had HF alone. CKM multimorbidity was associated with higher septal and posterior wall thickness, lower global longitudinal strain, higher E/e', and worse right ventricular function. Total HF hospitalizations or CV death increased with greater CKM multimorbidity, with the highest relative risk observed with three CKM conditions (rate ratio 3.06, 95% confidence interval 2.33-4.03), compared with HF alone. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent irrespective of the number of CKM conditions for the primary endpoint (p = 0.75), CV death (p = 0.82), total HF hospitalizations (p = 0.67), and the composite kidney endpoint (p = 0.99).
CONCLUSIONS
Cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic multimorbidity was common in PARAGON-HF and associated with adverse changes in cardiac structure and function and with a stepwise increase in risk of clinical outcomes. Treatment effects of sacubitril/valsartan were consistent irrespective of CKM burden.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01920711.
PubMed: 38932589
DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.3304 -
Trials Jun 2024Improving outcomes after surgery is a major public health research priority for patients, clinicians and the NHS. The greatest burden of perioperative complications,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Improving outcomes after surgery is a major public health research priority for patients, clinicians and the NHS. The greatest burden of perioperative complications, mortality and healthcare costs lies amongst the population of patients aged over 50 years who undergo major non-cardiac surgery. The Volatile vs Total Intravenous Anaesthesia for major non-cardiac surgery (VITAL) trial specifically examines the effect of anaesthetic technique on key patient outcomes: quality of recovery after surgery (quality of recovery after anaesthesia, patient satisfaction and major post-operative complications), survival and patient safety.
METHODS
A multi-centre pragmatic efficient randomised trial with health economic evaluation comparing total intravenous anaesthesia with volatile-based anaesthesia in adults (aged 50 and over) undergoing elective major non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia.
DISCUSSION
Given the very large number of patients exposed to general anaesthesia every year, even small differences in outcome between the two techniques could result in substantial excess harm. Results from the VITAL trial will ensure patients can benefit from the very safest anaesthesia care, promoting an early return home, reducing healthcare costs and maximising the health benefits of surgical treatments.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ISRCTN62903453. September 09, 2021.
Topics: Aged; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Anesthesia Recovery Period; Anesthesia, General; Anesthesia, Inhalation; Anesthesia, Intravenous; Elective Surgical Procedures; Health Care Costs; Patient Satisfaction; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38926770
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08159-w -
Trials Jun 2024Parents of children with a neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD) experience more stress than parents of typically developing children. In a cocreation process with experts...
Effectiveness of a positive psychology and mindfulness-based app on mental health for parents of children with a neurodevelopmental disorder: study protocol of a pragmatic international randomized controlled trial.
INTRODUCTION
Parents of children with a neurodevelopmental disorder (NDD) experience more stress than parents of typically developing children. In a cocreation process with experts and parents, a low-threshold application that uses exercises based on the principles of positive psychology and mindfulness was developed. This application, called "Adappt," aims at enhancing the ability to adapt of the parents and caregivers of children with NDDs and at supporting their mental health. This protocol describes the evaluation study of the effectiveness of Adappt, its core working mechanisms and user experiences.
METHOD
A pragmatic international multicenter randomized controlled trial will compare the effectiveness of Adappt with a (delayed) waitlist control condition. At least 212 parents or primary caregivers of children younger than 18 years diagnosed with or suspected of a NDD will be randomly assigned to the intervention or waitlist control condition. Participants are excluded if they have severe anxiety or depression levels or are in treatment for mental health issues. Measures will be collected online at baseline, post-intervention (1 month after baseline), and 4 and 7 months after baseline. The primary outcome is the improvement in generic sense of ability to adapt as measured with the Generic Sense of Ability to Adapt Scale (GSAAS; (Front Psychol 14:985408, 2023)) at 4-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes are mental well-being, (parental) distress, and client satisfaction with "Adappt."
DISCUSSION
Results of this study will contribute to knowledge on the effectiveness of a low-threshold application for parents of children with a NDD in multiple countries. If the application is found to be effective in improving mental health, recommendations will be made for implementation in health care.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06248762) on February 8, 2024, and the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/5znqv ).
Topics: Humans; Mindfulness; Parents; Mental Health; Neurodevelopmental Disorders; Child; Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Mobile Applications; Psychology, Positive; Adolescent; Stress, Psychological; Treatment Outcome; Adaptation, Psychological; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38926739
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-024-08256-w -
Heart Failure Reviews Jun 2024The Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure (PUSH-AHF) study, published in August of 2023, was the first randomized clinical trial to compare... (Review)
Review
The Pragmatic Urinary Sodium-based algoritHm in Acute Heart Failure (PUSH-AHF) study, published in August of 2023, was the first randomized clinical trial to compare natriuresis-guided decongestion (based on spot urinary sodium measurement) to standard of care in patients with acute heart failure with congestion receiving loop diuretic therapy. Based on results from their trial, the authors concluded that natriuresis-guided loop diuretic treatment was safe and improved natriuresis and diuresis without impacting long-term clinical outcomes. The original PUSH-AHF trial included limited information about renal outcomes and left clinicians with important questions about how natriuresis-guided decongestion might affect their patients' renal function. On May 12, 2024, however, at the 2024 Annual Congress of the HFA-ESC, Dr. Kevin Damman provided an in-depth exploration of renal outcomes from the trial when he presented a pre-specified, secondary analysis, renal function in the PUSH-AHF trial. This review puts the sub-study findings into context by considering the history of the original trial from which they came from and explaining the need for a close study of its renal outcomes particularly. It highlights the potential impact of renal function in PUSH-AHF on clinical practice and future directions that should be considered by the cardiology research community.
PubMed: 38926215
DOI: 10.1007/s10741-024-10411-z -
AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology Jun 2024Radiographic assessment plays a crucial role in the management of patients with central nervous system (CNS) tumors, aiding in treatment planning and evaluation of... (Review)
Review
Radiographic assessment plays a crucial role in the management of patients with central nervous system (CNS) tumors, aiding in treatment planning and evaluation of therapeutic efficacy by quantifying response. Recently, an updated version of the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria (RANO 2.0) was developed to improve upon prior criteria and provide an updated, standardized framework for assessing treatment response in clinical trials for gliomas in adults. This article provides an overview of significant updates to the criteria including (1) the use of a unified set of criteria for high and low grade gliomas in adults; (2) the use of the post-radiotherapy MRI scan as the baseline for evaluation in newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas; (3) the option for the trial to mandate a confirmation scan to more reliably distinguish pseudoprogression from tumor progression; (4) the option of using volumetric tumor measurements; and (5) the removal of subjective non-enhancing tumor evaluations in predominantly enhancing gliomas (except for specific therapeutic modalities). Step-by-step pragmatic guidance is hereby provided for the neuroradiologist and imaging core lab involved in operationalization and technical execution of RANO 2.0 in clinical trials, including the display of representative cases and in-depth discussion of challenging scenarios.ABBREVIATIONS: BTIP = Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol; CE = Contrast-Enhancing; CNS = Central Nervous System; CR = Complete Response; ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; HGG = High-Grade Glioma; IDH = Isocitrate Dehydrogenase; IRF = Independent Radiologic Facility; LGG = Low-Grade Glioma; KPS = Karnofsky Performance Status; MR = Minor Response; mRANO = Modified RANO; NANO = Neurological Assessment in Neuro-Oncology; ORR = Objective Response Rate; OS = Overall Survival; PD = Progressive Disease; PFS = Progression-Free Survival; PR = Partial Response; PsP = Pseudoprogression; RANO = Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology; RECIST = Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors; RT = Radiation Therapy; SD = Stable Disease; Tx = Treatment.
PubMed: 38926092
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A8396 -
BMJ Open Jun 2024To explore if there are differences in the design and/or conduct of studies that have tested the STarTBack treatment approach for the management of low back pain (LBP),... (Review)
Review
Evaluating the STarTBack stratified treatment approach for low back pain: exploring study-level factors potentially explaining differences in results of studies - a literature review.
OBJECTIVE
To explore if there are differences in the design and/or conduct of studies that have tested the STarTBack treatment approach for the management of low back pain (LBP), potentially explaining differences in study results.
DESIGN
A literature review.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched from inception to 26 July 2023.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included studies that included (1) participants with LBP and/or leg pain, (2) randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials and interrupted time series designs, (3) used the STarTBack Tool to stratify participants into subgroups and (4) studies provided matched treatments according to participants STarTBack score.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two review authors independently reviewed the search results and extracted data into the data extraction form. Due to the exploratory nature of this study, results are presented descriptively.
RESULTS
11 studies conducted across 5 countries were included. There were substantial differences in the proportion of participants allocated to the different risk groups; low-risk group (range: 19%-58%), medium risk group (range: 31%-52%) and high-risk group (range: 6%-38%). There were large differences between studies in the implementation of the STarTBack approach. The original STarTBack trial (Hill 2011) had a more explanatory design while in many subsequent studies, the design was more pragmatic/real world. Only the two original studies provided clear evidence that the implementation of the STarTBack tool led to a higher proportion of participants receiving matched treatment. In the other studies, there was no evidence of a difference, or it was unclear. In two studies, a researcher made the decision about which matched treatment participants received based on the STartTback Tool, while in nine studies, this was done by a clinician. Most studies recommended the same matched treatment for each risk group as per the original study except for a small number of studies. Only three studies reported whether the clinician delivering matched treatment followed the recommended treatment as per the tool. There was substantial variability in the training clinicians received.
CONCLUSIONS
Reporting of important study-level factors (eg, differences in study design, whether clinicians were trained and how the tool was used in each study) in how the STarTBack approach was implemented was unclear. There is some suggestion that key factors may include the individual who implemented the STarTBack tool, whether the recommendations of the tool were followed, the amount of training the clinician delivering the matched treatment received, and whether clinicians actually delivered the matched treatment.
Topics: Low Back Pain; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38925707
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081704 -
Journal of the National Cancer... Jun 2024Northwestern University's Center for Scalable Telehealth Cancer Care (STELLAR) is 1 of 4 Cancer Moonshot Telehealth Research Centers of Excellence programs funded by the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Northwestern University's Center for Scalable Telehealth Cancer Care (STELLAR) is 1 of 4 Cancer Moonshot Telehealth Research Centers of Excellence programs funded by the National Cancer Institute to establish an evidence base for telehealth in cancer care. STELLAR is grounded in the Institute of Medicine's vision that quality cancer care includes not only disease treatment but also promotion of long-term health and quality of life (QOL). Cigarette smoking, insufficient physical activity, and overweight and obesity often co-occur and are associated with poorer treatment response, heightened recurrence risk, decreased longevity, diminished QOL, and increased treatment cost for many cancers. These risk behaviors are prevalent in cancer survivors, but their treatment is not routinely integrated into oncology care. STELLAR aims to foster patients' long-term health and QOL by designing, implementing, and sustaining a novel telehealth treatment program for multiple risk behaviors to be integrated into standard cancer care. Telehealth delivery is evidence-based for health behavior change treatment and is well suited to overcome access and workflow barriers that can otherwise impede treatment receipt. This paper describes STELLAR's 2-arm randomized parallel group pragmatic clinical trial comparing telehealth-delivered, coach-facilitated multiple risk behavior treatment vs self-guided usual care for the outcomes of reach, effectiveness, and cost among 3000 cancer survivors who have completed curative intent treatment. This paper also discusses several challenges encountered by the STELLAR investigative team and the adaptations developed to move the research forward.
Topics: Humans; Telemedicine; Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Cancer Survivors; Healthy Lifestyle; Female; Male; Exercise; Middle Aged
PubMed: 38924795
DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgae020