Suppr超能文献

支气管扩张症临床试验中的多次呼吸洗脱:是否可行?

Multiple breath washout in bronchiectasis clinical trials: is it feasible?

作者信息

O'Neill Katherine, Ferguson Kathryn, Cosgrove Denis, Tunney Michael M, De Soyza Anthony, Carroll Mary, Chalmers James D, Gatheral Timothy, Hill Adam T, Hurst John R, Johnson Christopher, Loebinger Michael R, Angyalosi Gerhild, Haworth Charles S, Jensen Renee, Ratjen Felix, Saunders Clare, Short Christopher, Davies Jane C, Elborn J Stuart, Bradley Judy M

机构信息

Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University - Belfast, Belfast, UK.

On behalf of the BRONCH-UK consortium.

出版信息

ERJ Open Res. 2020 Oct 13;6(4). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00363-2019. eCollection 2020 Oct.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of multiple breath washout (MBW) set-up including staff training, certification and central "over-reading" for data quality control is essential to determine the feasibility of MBW in future bronchiectasis studies.

AIMS

To assess the outcomes of a MBW training, certification and central over-reading programme.

METHODS

MBW training and certification was conducted in European sites collecting lung clearance index (LCI) data in the BronchUK Clinimetrics and/or i-BEST-1 studies. The blended training programme included the use of an eLearning tool and a 1-day face-to-face session. Sites submitted MBW data to trained central over-readers who determined validity and quality.

RESULTS

Thirteen training days were delivered to 56 participants from 22 sites. Of 22 sites, 18 (82%) were MBW naïve. Participant knowledge and confidence increased significantly (p<0.001). By the end of the study recruitment, 15 of 22 sites (68%) had completed certification with a mean (range) time since training of 6.2 (3-14) months. In the BronchUK Clinimetrics study, 468 of 589 (79%) tests met the quality criteria following central over-reading, compared with 137 of 236 (58%) tests in the i-BEST-1 study.

CONCLUSIONS

LCI is feasible in a bronchiectasis multicentre clinical trial setting; however, consideration of site experience in terms of training as well as assessment of skill drift and the need for re-training may be important to reduce time to certification and optimise data quality. Longer times to certification, a higher percentage of naïve sites and patients with worse lung function may have contributed to the lower success rate in the i-BEST-1 study.

摘要

背景

评估多次呼气冲洗(MBW)设置,包括工作人员培训、认证以及用于数据质量控制的集中“复核”,对于确定MBW在未来支气管扩张症研究中的可行性至关重要。

目的

评估MBW培训、认证及集中复核计划的结果。

方法

在欧洲参与BronchUK临床测量学和/或i-BEST-1研究并收集肺清除指数(LCI)数据的站点开展MBW培训和认证。混合培训计划包括使用电子学习工具和为期1天的面对面课程。各站点将MBW数据提交给经过培训的集中复核人员,由他们确定数据的有效性和质量。

结果

为来自22个站点的56名参与者提供了13个培训日。在22个站点中,18个(82%)此前未开展过MBW。参与者的知识和信心显著提高(p<0.001)。到研究招募结束时,22个站点中有15个(68%)完成了认证,自培训以来的平均(范围)时间为6.2(3-14)个月。在BronchUK临床测量学研究中,589次测试中有468次(79%)在集中复核后符合质量标准,而在i-BEST-1研究中,236次测试中有137次(58%)符合标准。

结论

LCI在支气管扩张症多中心临床试验环境中是可行的;然而,考虑培训方面的站点经验以及评估技能偏差和再培训需求对于缩短认证时间和优化数据质量可能很重要。认证时间较长、新站点比例较高以及肺功能较差的患者可能导致了i-BEST-1研究中的成功率较低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0c0e/7553113/775d9df42bd3/00363-2019.01.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验