Armijo-Olivo Susan, Fuentes Jorge, da Costa Bruno R, Saltaji Humam, Ha Christine, Cummings Greta G
From the Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (SA-O, JF); Catholic University of Maule, Department of Physical Therapy, Talca, Chile (JF); Institute of Primary Health Care, Universitat Bern, Gesellschaftstrasse, Bern, Switzerland (BRdC); and School of Dentistry (HS), Rehabilitation Research Center (CH), and Edmonton Clinic Health Academy (GGC), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Jan;96(1):34-44. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000521.
The aim of this study was to examine whether blinding of participants, assessors, health providers, and statisticians have an effect on treatment effect estimates in physical therapy (PT) trials.
This was a meta-epidemiological study. Randomized controlled trials in PT were identified by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for meta-analyses of PT interventions. Assessments of blinding in PT trials were conducted independently following established guidelines.
Three hundred ninety-three trials and 43 meta-analyses that included 44,622 patients contributed to this study. Only a quarter of the trials were adequately blinded (n = 80; 20%). Most individual components of blinding as well as what they were blinded to were also poorly reported. Although trials with inappropriate blinding of assessors and participants tended to underestimate treatment effects when compared with trials with appropriate blinding of assessors and participants, the difference was not statistically significant (effect size, -0.07; 95% confidence interval, -0.22 to 0.08; effect size, -0.12; 95% confidence interval, -0.30 to 0.06, respectively).
The lack of statistical significance between blinding and effect sizes should not be interpreted as meaning that an impact of blinding on effect size is not present in PT. More empirical evidence in a larger sample is needed to determine which biases are likely to influence reported effect sizes of PT trials and under which conditions.
本研究旨在探讨在物理治疗(PT)试验中,对参与者、评估者、医疗服务提供者和统计人员实施盲法是否会对治疗效果估计产生影响。
这是一项元流行病学研究。通过检索Cochrane系统评价数据库中关于PT干预的元分析,确定PT领域的随机对照试验。按照既定指南独立进行PT试验中的盲法评估。
393项试验和43项元分析纳入了本研究,共涉及44,622名患者。仅有四分之一的试验实施了充分的盲法(n = 80;20%)。关于盲法的大多数个体组成部分以及被设盲的内容报告也很欠缺。与评估者和参与者设盲恰当的试验相比,评估者和参与者设盲不当的试验往往会低估治疗效果,但差异无统计学意义(效应量分别为 -0.07;95%置信区间为 -0.22至0.08;效应量为 -0.12;95%置信区间为 -0.30至0.06)。
盲法与效应量之间缺乏统计学意义不应被解释为在PT中盲法对效应量没有影响。需要在更大样本中获取更多实证证据,以确定哪些偏倚可能影响PT试验报告的效应量以及在何种情况下会产生影响。