Kallert T W, Schützwohl M
Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden.
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2002 Dec;70(12):647-56. doi: 10.1055/s-2002-35856.
This article outlines problems of implementation and clinical practice of randomised controlled trials in mental health services. Furthermore, it offers practical solutions taking into account the experiences with a randomisation process in a multi-site EC-funded (EDEN-) study on the evaluation of acute treatment in psychiatric day hospitals. Identification of the problems follows the time-course of a research project: 1. Problems to be solved prior to the study's commencement: Definition of the eligibility criteria, information of clinically working colleagues. 2. Problems referring to the process of randomisation: Influence of clinical experience of the research fellows, precise time-point of implementing the randomisation into the process of admission, assessment of the patient's ability to give informed consent, patient's refusal of randomisation but agreement to study participation, availability of treatment places. 3. Problems which might occur after randomisation: Early break-off of treatment, transfer from one treatment setting to another. General conclusion: Detailed definitions of the randomisation procedure do not guarantee high performance quality and randomisation rates. Continuous precise assessment of the implementation into the clinical routines of every study centre, adaptation according to specific conditions and personal discussions with all participants are obligatory to establish and maintain a high quality of this important research procedure.
本文概述了精神卫生服务中随机对照试验的实施问题和临床实践。此外,结合一项由欧盟资助的多中心(EDEN-)研究中关于精神病日间医院急性治疗评估的随机化过程经验,提供了切实可行的解决方案。问题的识别遵循研究项目的时间进程:1. 研究开始前需解决的问题:确定纳入标准,告知临床工作的同事。2. 与随机化过程相关的问题:研究员临床经验的影响,在入院过程中实施随机化的精确时间点,评估患者给予知情同意的能力,患者拒绝随机化但同意参与研究,治疗场所的可用性。3. 随机化后可能出现的问题:治疗提前中断,从一种治疗环境转至另一种治疗环境。总体结论:随机化程序的详细定义并不能保证高性能质量和随机化率。对每个研究中心临床常规实施情况进行持续精确评估,根据具体情况进行调整,并与所有参与者进行个人讨论,对于建立和维持这一重要研究程序的高质量至关重要。