Pain Research, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington and Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA, United States.
Pain. 2023 Jul 1;164(7):1457-1472. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002888. Epub 2023 Mar 22.
Many questions regarding the clinical management of people experiencing pain and related health policy decision-making may best be answered by pragmatic controlled trials. To generate clinically relevant and widely applicable findings, such trials aim to reproduce elements of routine clinical care or are embedded within clinical workflows. In contrast with traditional efficacy trials, pragmatic trials are intended to address a broader set of external validity questions critical for stakeholders (clinicians, healthcare leaders, policymakers, insurers, and patients) in considering the adoption and use of evidence-based treatments in daily clinical care. This article summarizes methodological considerations for pragmatic trials, mainly concerning methods of fundamental importance to the internal validity of trials. The relationship between these methods and common pragmatic trials methods and goals is considered, recognizing that the resulting trial designs are highly dependent on the specific research question under investigation. The basis of this statement was an Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) systematic review of methods and a consensus meeting. The meeting was organized by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership. The consensus process was informed by expert presentations, panel and consensus discussions, and a preparatory systematic review. In the context of pragmatic trials of pain treatments, we present fundamental considerations for the planning phase of pragmatic trials, including the specification of trial objectives, the selection of adequate designs, and methods to enhance internal validity while maintaining the ability to answer pragmatic research questions.
许多关于疼痛患者临床管理和相关卫生政策决策的问题,最好通过实用的对照试验来解答。为了产生具有临床相关性和广泛适用性的发现,此类试验旨在再现常规临床护理的某些元素,或嵌入临床工作流程中。与传统的疗效试验相比,实用试验旨在解决更广泛的外部有效性问题,这些问题对利益相关者(临床医生、医疗保健领导者、政策制定者、保险公司和患者)在考虑采用和使用基于证据的治疗方法在日常临床护理中至关重要。本文总结了实用试验的方法学考虑因素,主要涉及对试验内部有效性至关重要的方法。还考虑了这些方法与常见实用试验方法和目标之间的关系,认识到由此产生的试验设计高度取决于正在研究的具体研究问题。这一说法的依据是一项关于方法、测量和临床试验中疼痛评估的倡议(IMMPACT)对方法的系统评价和一次共识会议。该会议由止痛、麻醉和成瘾临床试验转化、创新、机遇和网络(ACTION)公私合作伙伴关系组织。共识过程以专家介绍、小组和共识讨论以及预备系统评价为依据。在疼痛治疗实用试验的背景下,我们提出了实用试验规划阶段的基本考虑因素,包括试验目标的规定、适当设计的选择,以及在保持回答实用研究问题能力的同时提高内部有效性的方法。