Suppr超能文献

当前谵妄预防试验中潜在的安慰剂偏倚:86项随机对照试验的网状Meta分析

Potential placebo bias in current trials of delirium prevention: a network meta-analysis of 86 randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Zeng Bing-Yan, Liang Chih-Sung, Hsu Chih-Wei, Lei Wei-Te, Thompson Trevor, Chen Yen-Wen, Chen Tien-Yu, Tseng Ping-Tao, Shiue Yow-Ling

机构信息

Institute of Biomedical Sciences, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Department of Internal Medicine, E-Da Dachang Hospital, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

出版信息

Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2025 Aug;79(8):481-487. doi: 10.1111/pcn.13850. Epub 2025 Jun 18.

Abstract

AIM

Numerous network meta-analyses (NMAs) have reported inconsistent findings on the efficacy of various pharmacologic treatments for delirium prevention in high-risk patients. A potential confounder was the study design-using a placebo control or standard-of-care (SoC) control. We reexamined the incident delirium between SoC plus placebo and SoC alone in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on delirium prevention.

METHODS

We systematically searched for relevant RCTs on pharmacotherapies for delirium prevention from the inception of electronic databases through 30 November 2023. The primary outcome was delirium incidence, with secondary consideration given to all-cause mortality. We conducted a frequentist NMA using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the effect size.

RESULTS

The NMA results from 86 RCTs (19,889 participants, with a mean age of 68.5 years, and a mean female proportion of 44.0%) revealed that SoC plus placebo was associated with a lower risk of incident delirium than SoC alone (RR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.41-0.88]). The RR of all-cause mortality was not significant between these two study designs.

CONCLUSION

We found placebo effects on the incidence of delirium in RCTs involving high-risk patients. Further RCTs should consider a three-arm, parallel design including both a placebo group and an SoC group to replicate our study findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42023488481.

摘要

目的

众多网络荟萃分析(NMA)报告了各种药物治疗对高危患者谵妄预防效果的不一致结果。一个潜在的混杂因素是研究设计——使用安慰剂对照或标准治疗(SoC)对照。我们重新审视了在谵妄预防的随机对照试验(RCT)中,SoC加安慰剂与单纯SoC相比的谵妄发生率。

方法

我们系统检索了从电子数据库建立到2023年11月30日期间有关预防谵妄药物治疗的相关RCT。主要结局是谵妄发生率,次要考虑全因死亡率。我们进行了频率学派的NMA,使用风险比(RR)及其95%置信区间(CI)作为效应量。

结果

86项RCT(19889名参与者,平均年龄68.5岁,女性平均比例44.0%)的NMA结果显示,SoC加安慰剂与单纯SoC相比,发生谵妄的风险更低(RR,0.60 [95% CI,0.41 - 0.88])。这两种研究设计之间全因死亡率的RR无显著差异。

结论

我们发现在涉及高危患者的RCT中,安慰剂对谵妄发生率有影响。进一步的RCT应考虑采用包括安慰剂组和SoC组的三臂平行设计,以重复我们的研究结果。

试验注册

CRD42023488481。

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