Suppr超能文献

糖尿病管理干预研究:两项研究的经验教训。

Diabetes management intervention studies: lessons learned from two studies.

机构信息

Roche Diabetes Care GmbH, Mannheim, Germany.

Institut für Diabetes-Technologie, Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm, Lise-Meitner-Strasse 8/2, 89081, Ulm, Germany.

出版信息

Trials. 2021 Jan 18;22(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-05017-3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Several clinical studies investigated improvements of patient outcomes due to diabetes management interventions. However, chronic disease management is intricate with complex multifactorial behavior patterns. Such studies thus have to be well designed in order to allocate all observed effects to the defined intervention and to exclude effects of other confounders as well as possible. This article aims to provide challenges in interpreting diabetes management intervention studies and suggests approaches for optimizing study implementation and for avoiding pitfalls based on current experiences.

MAIN BODY

Lessons from the STeP and ProValue studies demonstrated the difficulty in medical device studies that rely on behavioral changes in intervention group patients. To successfully engage patients, priority should be given to health care professionals being engaged, operational support in technical issues being available, and adherence being assessed in detail. Another difficulty is to avoid contamination of the control group with the intervention; therefore, strict allocation concealment should be maintained. However, randomization and blinding are not always possible. A limited effect size due to improvements regarding clinical endpoints in the control group is often caused by the Hawthorne effect. Improvements in the control group can also be caused with increased attention paid to the subjects. In order to reduce improvements in the control group, it is essential to identify the specific reasons and adjust study procedures accordingly. A pilot phase is indispensable for this. Another option is to include a third study arm to control for enhanced standard of care and study effects. Furthermore, retrospective data collection could be a feasible option. Adaptive study designs might reduce the necessity of a separate pilot study and combine the exploratory and confirmatory stages of an investigation in one single study.

CONCLUSION

There are several aspects to consider in medical device studies when using interventions that rely on changes in behavior to achieve an effective implementation and significant study results. Improvements in the control group may reduce effect sizes and limit statistical significance; therefore, alternatives to the traditional randomized controlled trials may be considered.

摘要

简介

多项临床研究探讨了糖尿病管理干预对患者预后的改善。然而,慢性病管理涉及复杂的多因素行为模式,因此这些研究必须精心设计,以便将所有观察到的效果归因于定义的干预措施,并尽可能排除其他混杂因素的影响。本文旨在探讨糖尿病管理干预研究的解释挑战,并根据当前经验提出优化研究实施和避免陷阱的方法。

主要内容

STeP 和 ProValue 研究的经验教训表明,依赖干预组患者行为变化的医疗器械研究存在困难。为了成功吸引患者,应优先考虑让医疗保健专业人员参与,提供技术问题方面的运营支持,并详细评估依从性。另一个困难是避免对照组受到干预措施的影响;因此,应严格保持分配隐匿性。然而,随机化和盲法并不总是可行的。由于对照组在临床终点方面的改善,导致效果量有限,这通常是由于霍桑效应。对照组的改善也可能是由于对研究对象的关注度增加所致。为了减少对照组的改善,必须确定具体原因,并相应地调整研究程序。为此,进行试点阶段是必不可少的。另一种选择是纳入第三个研究组,以控制增强的标准护理和研究效果。此外,回顾性数据收集可能是一种可行的选择。适应性研究设计可能减少对单独试点研究的需求,并将研究的探索性和验证性阶段合并为一个单一的研究。

结论

在使用依赖行为改变的干预措施进行医疗器械研究时,有几个方面需要考虑,以实现有效的实施和显著的研究结果。对照组的改善可能会降低效果大小并限制统计学意义;因此,可以考虑替代传统的随机对照试验。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/26f8/7812736/2053c8c2816a/13063_2020_5017_Fig1_HTML.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