Suppr超能文献

通过提供者协议实现工程实践差异:一项整群随机可行性试验。

Engineering practice variation through provider agreement: a cluster-randomized feasibility trial.

作者信息

McCarren Madeline, Twedt Elaine L, Mansuri Faizmohamed M, Nelson Philip R, Peek Brian T

机构信息

Pharmacy Benefits Management Services, Department of Veterans Affairs, Hines, IL, USA.

Wilkes-Barre VA Medical Center, Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA.

出版信息

Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2014 Oct 28;10:905-12. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S69878. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Minimal-risk randomized trials that can be embedded in practice could facilitate learning health-care systems. A cluster-randomized design was proposed to compare treatment strategies by assigning clusters (eg, providers) to "favor" a particular drug, with providers retaining autonomy for specific patients. Patient informed consent might be waived, broadening inclusion. However, it is not known if providers will adhere to the assignment or whether institutional review boards will waive consent. We evaluated the feasibility of this trial design.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Agreeable providers were randomized to "favor" either hydrochlorothiazide or chlorthalidone when starting patients on thiazide-type therapy for hypertension. The assignment applied when the provider had already decided to start a thiazide, and providers could deviate from the strategy as needed. Prescriptions were aggregated to produce a provider strategy-adherence rate.

RESULTS

All four institutional review boards waived documentation of patient consent. Providers (n=18) followed their assigned strategy for most of their new thiazide prescriptions (n=138 patients). In the "favor hydrochlorothiazide" group, there was 99% adherence to that strategy. In the "favor chlorthalidone" group, chlorthalidone comprised 77% of new thiazide starts, up from 1% in the pre-study period. When the assigned strategy was followed, dosing in the recommended range was 48% for hydrochlorothiazide (25-50 mg/day) and 100% for chlorthalidone (12.5-25.0 mg/day). Providers were motivated to participate by a desire to contribute to a comparative effectiveness study. A study promotional mug, provider information letter, and interactions with the site investigator were identified as most helpful in reminding providers of their study drug strategy.

CONCLUSION

Providers prescribed according to an assigned drug-choice strategy most of the time for the purpose of a comparative effectiveness study. This simple design could facilitate research participation and behavior change in non-research clinicians. Waiver of patient consent can broaden the representation of patients, providers, and settings.

摘要

目的

可融入实际医疗的低风险随机试验有助于推动学习型医疗保健系统的发展。有人提出采用整群随机设计,通过将群组(如医疗服务提供者)分配为“倾向于”使用某种特定药物来比较治疗策略,同时医疗服务提供者在针对特定患者时仍保留自主权。患者知情同意书或许可以免除,从而扩大纳入范围。然而,尚不清楚医疗服务提供者是否会遵循分配方案,以及机构审查委员会是否会免除同意书要求。我们评估了这种试验设计的可行性。

研究对象与方法

将愿意参与的医疗服务提供者随机分组,使其在为高血压患者启动噻嗪类药物治疗时“倾向于”使用氢氯噻嗪或氯噻酮。该分配方案在医疗服务提供者已决定开始使用噻嗪类药物时适用,且他们可根据需要偏离该策略。汇总处方以得出医疗服务提供者对策略的遵循率。

结果

所有四个机构审查委员会均免除了患者同意书的文件要求。医疗服务提供者(共18名)在其大多数新的噻嗪类药物处方(涉及138名患者)中遵循了分配给他们的策略。在“倾向于氢氯噻嗪”组中,对该策略的遵循率为99%。在“倾向于氯噻酮”组中,氯噻酮在新启动的噻嗪类药物中占比77%,高于研究前期的1%。当遵循分配的策略时,氢氯噻嗪(25 - 50毫克/天)在推荐剂量范围内的给药比例为48%,氯噻酮(12.5 - 25.0毫克/天)为100%。医疗服务提供者因希望为一项比较疗效研究做出贡献而积极参与。研究宣传杯、给医疗服务提供者的信息信函以及与现场研究者的互动被认为最有助于提醒医疗服务提供者其研究药物策略。

结论

为了进行比较疗效研究,医疗服务提供者大多时候会按照分配的药物选择策略开处方。这种简单的设计可以促进非研究型临床医生参与研究并改变行为。免除患者同意书可以扩大患者、医疗服务提供者和医疗环境的代表性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0636/4218905/4bffa3d6bf69/tcrm-10-905Fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验