Horn Susan D, Gassaway Julie
International Severity Information Systems, Inc.; and Institute for Clinical Outcomes Research, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Med Care. 2007 Oct;45(10 Supl 2):S50-7. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318070c07b.
To describe a new, rigorous, comprehensive practice-based evidence for clinical practice improvement (PBE-CPI) study methodology, and compare its features, advantages, and disadvantages to those of randomized controlled trials and sophisticated statistical methods for comparative effectiveness research.
PBE-CPI incorporates natural variation within data from routine clinical practice to determine what works, for whom, when, and at what cost. It uses the knowledge of front-line caregivers, who develop study questions and define variables as part of a transdisciplinary team. Its comprehensive measurement framework provides a basis for analyses of significant bivariate and multivariate associations between treatments and outcomes, controlling for patient differences, such as severity of illness.
PBE-CPI studies can uncover better practices more quickly than randomized controlled trials or sophisticated statistical methods, while achieving many of the same advantages. We present examples of actionable findings from PBE-CPI studies in postacute care settings related to comparative effectiveness of medications, nutritional support approaches, incontinence products, physical therapy activities, and other services.
Outcomes improved when practices associated with better outcomes in PBE-CPI analyses were adopted in practice.
描述一种全新的、严谨的、基于实践的临床实践改进证据(PBE-CPI)研究方法,并将其特点、优势及劣势与随机对照试验和用于比较效果研究的复杂统计方法进行比较。
PBE-CPI纳入常规临床实践数据中的自然变异,以确定何种措施有效、对谁有效、何时有效以及成本多少。它利用一线护理人员的知识,这些人员作为跨学科团队的一部分提出研究问题并定义变量。其全面的测量框架为分析治疗与结局之间显著的双变量和多变量关联提供了基础,同时控制患者差异,如疾病严重程度。
PBE-CPI研究比随机对照试验或复杂统计方法能更快地发现更好的实践方法,同时具备许多相同优势。我们展示了在急性后期护理环境中PBE-CPI研究的可操作结果示例,这些结果与药物、营养支持方法、失禁用品、物理治疗活动及其他服务的比较效果相关。
当在实践中采用PBE-CPI分析中与更好结局相关的实践方法时,结局得到改善。