Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Department of Health Services Research, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2021 Feb;25(10):1-192. doi: 10.3310/hta25100.
Although non-operative treatment is known to be effective for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children, randomised trial data comparing important outcomes of non-operative treatment with those of appendicectomy are lacking.
The objectives were to ascertain the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a non-operative treatment pathway with appendicectomy for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children.
This was a mixed-methods study, which included a feasibility randomised controlled trial, embedded and parallel qualitative and survey studies, a parallel health economic feasibility study and the development of a core outcome set.
This study was set in three specialist NHS paediatric surgical units in England.
Children (aged 4-15 years) clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis participated in the feasibility randomised controlled trial. Children, their families, recruiting clinicians and other health-care professionals involved in caring for children with appendicitis took part in the qualitative study. UK specialist paediatric surgeons took part in the survey. Specialist paediatric surgeons, adult general surgeons who treat children, and children and young people who previously had appendicitis, along with their families, took part in the development of the core outcome set.
Participants in the feasibility randomised controlled trial were randomised to a non-operative treatment pathway (broad-spectrum antibiotics and active observation) or appendicectomy.
The primary outcome measure was the proportion of eligible patients recruited to the feasibility trial.
Data were sourced from NHS case notes, questionnaire responses, transcribed audio-recordings of recruitment discussions and qualitative interviews.
Overall, 50% (95% confidence interval 40% to 59%) of 115 eligible patients approached about the trial agreed to participate and were randomised. There was high acceptance of randomisation and good adherence to trial procedures and follow-up (follow-up rates of 89%, 85% and 85% at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months, respectively). More participants had perforated appendicitis than had been anticipated. Qualitative work enabled us to communicate about the trial effectively with patients and families, to design and deliver bespoke training to optimise recruitment and to understand how to optimise the design and delivery of a future trial. The health economic study indicated that the main cost drivers are the ward stay cost and the cost of the operation; it has also informed quality-of-life assessment methods for future work. A core outcome set for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis in children and young people was developed, containing 14 outcomes. There is adequate surgeon interest to justify proceeding to an effectiveness trial, with 51% of those surveyed expressing a willingness to recruit with an unchanged trial protocol.
Because the feasibility randomised controlled trial was performed in only three centres, successful recruitment across a larger number of sites cannot be guaranteed. However, the qualitative work has informed a bespoke training package to facilitate this. Although survey results suggest adequate clinician interest to make a larger trial possible, actual participation may differ, and equipoise may have changed over time.
A future effectiveness trial is feasible, following limited additional preparation, to establish appropriate outcome measures and case identification. It is recommended to include a limited package of qualitative work to optimise recruitment, in particular at new centres.
Prior to proceeding to an effectiveness trial, there is a need to develop a robust method for distinguishing children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis from those with more advanced appendicitis, and to reach agreement on a primary outcome measure and effect size that is acceptable to all stakeholder groups involved.
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15830435.
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 25, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
虽然非手术治疗对于儿童单纯性急性阑尾炎的治疗是有效的,但缺乏比较非手术治疗与阑尾切除术的重要结局的随机试验数据。
旨在确定进行多中心随机对照试验的可行性,该试验比较了儿童单纯性急性阑尾炎的非手术治疗途径与阑尾切除术的临床效果和成本效益。
这是一项混合方法研究,包括一项可行性随机对照试验,嵌入和并行的定性和调查研究,一项并行的健康经济学可行性研究和核心结局集的制定。
本研究在英格兰的三个 NHS 儿科外科专科单位进行。
临床诊断为单纯性急性阑尾炎的儿童(年龄 4-15 岁)参加了可行性随机对照试验。儿童、他们的家人、参与诊治的临床医生和其他参与阑尾炎患儿护理的卫生保健专业人员参加了定性研究。英国专科儿科外科医生参加了调查。专科儿科外科医生、治疗儿童的成人普外科医生、曾患有阑尾炎的儿童和年轻人,以及他们的家人,参与了核心结局集的制定。
参加可行性随机对照试验的患者被随机分配到非手术治疗途径(广谱抗生素和主动观察)或阑尾切除术。
主要结局测量是符合试验条件的患者比例。
数据来自 NHS 病历、问卷回复、招募讨论的转录音频记录和定性访谈。
总体而言,115 名符合条件的患者中,有 50%(95%置信区间 40%-59%)同意参与并随机分配。随机分组的接受度很高,并且试验程序和随访的依从性很好(分别在 6 周、3 个月和 6 个月时,随访率为 89%、85%和 85%)。穿孔性阑尾炎的患者比预期的要多。定性工作使我们能够与患者和家属有效地沟通试验,设计和提供专门的培训以优化招募,并了解如何优化未来试验的设计和实施。健康经济学研究表明,主要的成本驱动因素是病房住院费用和手术费用;它还为未来的工作提供了生活质量评估方法。制定了一个儿童和青少年单纯性急性阑尾炎的核心结局集,包含 14 个结局。有足够的外科医生兴趣来证明进行有效性试验是合理的,51%的受访者表示愿意按照不变的试验方案进行招募。
由于可行性随机对照试验仅在三个中心进行,因此不能保证在更多的地点进行成功的招募。然而,定性工作已经制定了一个专门的培训包来促进这一点。尽管调查结果表明,有足够的临床医生有兴趣进行更大规模的试验,但实际参与可能会有所不同,而且平衡可能会随着时间的推移而改变。
在进行进一步的准备工作之后,进行一项评估非手术治疗和阑尾切除术治疗单纯性急性阑尾炎的有效性的试验是可行的,目的是确定适当的结局测量和病例识别方法。建议在新的中心增加一些定性工作,以优化招募。
在进行有效性试验之前,需要开发一种可靠的方法来区分单纯性急性阑尾炎患儿和更严重阑尾炎患儿,并就所有利益相关者群体都能接受的主要结局测量和效应大小达成一致。
当前对照试验 ISRCTN82115152。
本项目由英国国家卫生研究院(NIHR)卫生技术评估计划资助,将在 杂志全文发表;第 25 卷,第 10 期。请访问 NIHR 期刊库网站以获取进一步的项目信息。