Trial outcomes and information for clinical decision-making: a comparative study of opinions of health professionals

نویسندگان

  • Angus G. K. McNair
  • Sara T. Brookes
  • Robert N. Whistance
  • Rachael O. Forsythe
  • Rhiannon Macefield
  • Jonathan Rees
  • James Jones
  • George Smith
  • Anne M. Pullyblank
  • Kerry N. L. Avery
  • Michael G. Thomas
  • Paul A. Sylvester
  • Anne Russell
  • Alfred Oliver
  • Dion Morton
  • Robin Kennedy
  • David G. Jayne
  • Richard Huxtable
  • Rowland Hackett
  • Susan J. Dutton
  • Mark G. Coleman
  • Mia Card
  • Julia Brown
  • Jane M. Blazeby
چکیده

BACKGROUND Trials are robust sources of data for clinical practice; however, trial outcomes may not reflect what is important to communicate for decision-making. The study compared clinicians' views of outcomes to include in a core outcome set for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, with what clinicians considered important information for clinical practice (core information). METHODS Potential outcome/information domains were identified through systematic literature reviews, reviews of hospital information leaflets and interviews with patients. These were organized into six categories and used to design a questionnaire survey that asked surgeons and nurses from a sample of CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain as an outcome or as information on a nine-point Likert scale. Respondents were re-surveyed (round 2) following group feedback (Delphi methods). Comparisons were made by calculating the difference in mean scores between the outcomes and information domains, and paired t tests were used to explore the difference between mean scores of the six outcome/information categories. RESULTS Data sources identified 1216 outcome/information items for CRC surgery that informed a 94-item questionnaire. First-round questionnaires were returned from 63/81 (78 %) of centers. Clinicians rated 76/94 (84 %) domains of higher importance to measure in trials than information to communicate to patients in round 1. This was reduced to 24/47 (51 %) in round 2. The greatest difference was evident in domains regarding survival, which was rated much more highly as a trial outcome than an important piece of information for decision-making (difference in mean 2.3, 95 % CI 1.9 to 2.8, p <0.0001). Specific complications and quality-of-life domains were rated similarly (difference in mean 0.18, 95 % CI -0.1 to 0.4, p = 0.2 and difference in mean 0.2, 95 % CI -0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.2, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Whilst clinicians want to measure key outcomes in trials, they rate these as less important to communicate in decision-making with patients. This discrepancy needs to be explored and addressed to maximize the impact of trials on clinical practice.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The Effect of Decision Aid's Pakage in Selected Treatment by Patients with Early Stage Breast Cancer and Decision making Outcomes

Background & Objectives: One of the basic principle of the protection of the patient, the patient's right to make decisions for their health. In this study, the effect of using decision aid's package was studied on choice of treatment and decision making outcomes in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Materials and Methods: This research is a clinical trial, performed on 30 patients with ...

متن کامل

A Comparative Study of the Clinical Informatics Fellowship Curriculum in Selected Universities of the World

Introduction: The American Medical Association has introduced the newest medical subspecialty field known as "Clinical Informatics" since 2011. In order to present similar courses in Iran, it is necessary to design and evaluate a training program. The comparison of educational systems improves the content and quality of design of an educational program. Therefore, the objective of this study wa...

متن کامل

A Comparative Study of the Clinical Informatics Fellowship Curriculum in Selected Universities of the World

Introduction: The American Medical Association has introduced the newest medical subspecialty field known as "Clinical Informatics" since 2011. In order to present similar courses in Iran, it is necessary to design and evaluate a training program. The comparison of educational systems improves the content and quality of design of an educational program. Therefore, the objective of this study wa...

متن کامل

Nurses' perception of clinical decision making in hospitals of Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences in 2019

Background and aim: The most important factor affecting the quality of care is the ability of nurses to make effective clinical decisions. Since identifying nurses 'perceptions of clinical decision making is an important step in improving the quality of care, this study done to determine nurses' perceptions of clinical decision making in hospitals of Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences. M...

متن کامل

An Introduction to Policy Delphi; A tool for discovering the opposing views on health policy issues

Objective: In this review, we investigated various aspects of Policy Delphi technique to make decision-makers more aware of this pertinent method so that they can use it in their policy decisions in their organizations. Information sources and selected methods for study: This study was conducted using a review method and by searching the related literature in databases such as PubMed, Scopus a...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 17  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2016