1
|
Machalicek W, Gross DP, Armijo-Olivo S, Ferriero G, Kiekens C, Martin R, Walshe M, Negrini S. The role of single case experimental designs in evidence creation in rehabilitation. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2024; 60:1100-1111. [PMID: 39374052 PMCID: PMC11729724 DOI: 10.23736/s1973-9087.24.08713-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2024] [Accepted: 09/19/2024] [Indexed: 10/08/2024]
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard of evidence guiding intervention selection in rehabilitation. However, conduct of sufficiently powered RCTs in rehabilitation can be expensive, pose ethical and attrition concerns when participants are assigned to ineffective treatment as usual conditions, and are infeasible with low-incidence populations. Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs), including N-of-1 RCTs are causal inference studies for small numbers of participants and not necessarily one participant as the name implies. These designs are increasingly used to evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in diverse clinical settings and employ design features including but not limited to randomization and each participant serving as their own control. These and other internal validity enhancements can increase the confidence in study results coming from these designs. This manuscript discusses the expanded application of SCEDs in rehabilitation contexts to answer everyday clinical rehabilitation research questions with emphasis on strategies to use: 1) to maximize internal validity of this family of designs; 2) improve utility, effectiveness, and acceptability of these designs for rehabilitation end-users (clinicians, policymakers, and participants); 3) build evidence bases in areas of rehabilitation where RCTs are uncommonly used. Primary considerations for situating SCEDs within the continuum of experimental designs include increasing internal validity within designs, improving transparency in conduct and reporting of these studies, and increasing access to advanced research methods training for rehabilitation professionals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Stefano Negrini
- IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopedic Institute, Milan, Italy
- University "La Statale", Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Arienti C, Armijo-Olivo S, Minozzi S, Tjosvold L, Lazzarini SG, Patrini M, Negrini S. Methodological Issues in Rehabilitation Research: A Scoping Review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2021; 102:1614-1622.e14. [PMID: 33989598 DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.04.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2020] [Revised: 03/22/2021] [Accepted: 04/22/2021] [Indexed: 01/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify, synthesize, and categorize the methodological issues faced by the rehabilitation field. DATA SOURCES A scoping review was conducted using studies identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Google Scholar up to August 2018. STUDY SELECTION We included all type of publications describing methodological issues in rehabilitation research where rehabilitation is described as a multimodal process. The methodological issues have been categorized and classified. DATA EXTRACTION The synthesis included qualitative and quantitative analysis. To focus the attention on rehabilitation, we post hoc divided in "specific issues" (highly related to, even if not exclusive of, rehabilitation research) and "generic issues" (common in biomedical research). DATA SYNTHESIS Seventy-one publications were included: 68% were narrative reviews, 15% systematic reviews, 7% editorials, 4% meta-epidemiologic studies, and 5% others. Specific methodological issues include the following: problematic application of randomized controlled trials (32%), absent definition of core outcome sets (28%), poor interventions description (22%), weak methodological (conducting) and reporting quality (21%), scarce clinical practice applicability (14%), lack of blinding assessor (10%), inadequate randomization methods or inadequate allocation concealment (8%), and inadequate participants description and recruitment (8%). "Generic" issues included the following: data and statistical description (31%), authors' methodological training (7%), peer review process (6%, n=4), funding declaration (6%), ethical statement (3%), protocol registration (3%), and conflict of interest declaration (1%). CONCLUSIONS Methodological and reporting issues might influence the quality of the evidence produced in rehabilitation research. The next steps to move forward in the field of rehabilitation could be to evaluate the influence of all these issues on the validity of trial results through meta-epidemiologic studies and to develop specific checklists to provide guidance to authors to improve the reporting and conduct of trials in this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Susan Armijo-Olivo
- University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Business and Social Sciences, Osnabrück, Germany; Faculties of Rehabilitation Medicine and Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Silvia Minozzi
- Department of Epidemiology, Lazio Regional Health Service, Rome, Italy
| | - Lisa Tjosvold
- Institute of Health Economics, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | | | | | - Stefano Negrini
- Department of Biomedical, Surgical, and Dental Sciences, University of Milan "La Statale", Milan, Italy; IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Arienti C, Kiekens C, Bettinsoli R, Engkasan JP, Frischknecht R, Gimigliano F, Grubisic F, Howe T, Iannicelli V, Ilieva E, Lazzarini SG, Levack WM, Meyer T, Oral A, Patrini M, Pollini E, Rathore FA, Negrini S. Cochrane Rehabilitation: 2020 annual report. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2021; 57:303-308. [PMID: 33971699 DOI: 10.23736/s1973-9087.21.06877-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
During its fourth year of existence, Cochrane Rehabilitation went on to promote evidence-informed health decision-making in rehabilitation. In 2020, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has made it necessary to alter priorities. In these challenging times, Cochrane Rehabilitation has firstly changed its internal organisation and established a new relevant project in line with pandemic needs: the REH-COVER (Rehabilitation - COVID-19 evidence-based response) action. The aim was to focus on the timely collection, review and dissemination of summarised and synthesised evidence relating to COVID-19 and rehabilitation. Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER action has included in 2020 five main initiatives: 1) rapid living systematic reviews on rehabilitation and COVID-19; 2) interactive living evidence map on rehabilitation and COVID-19; 3) definition of the research topics on "rehabilitation and COVID-19" in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) rehabilitation programme; 4) Cochrane Library special collection on Coronavirus (COVID-19) rehabilitation; and 5) collaboration with COVID-END for the topics "rehabilitation" and "disability." Furthermore, we are still carrying on five different special projects: Be4rehab; RCTRACK; definition of rehabilitation for research purposes; ebook project; and a prioritization exercise for Cochrane Reviews production. The Review Working Area continued to identify and "tag" the rehabilitation-relevant reviews published in the Cochrane library; the Publication Working Area went on to publish Cochrane Corners, working more closely with the Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) and Cochrane Networks, particularly with Cochrane Musculoskeletal, Oral, Skin and Sensory Network; the Education Working Area, the most damaged in 2020, tried to continue performing educational activities such as workshops in different online meetings; the Methodology Working Area organized the third and fourth Cochrane Rehabilitation Methodological (CRM) meetings respectively in Milan and Orlando; the Communication Working Area spread rehabilitation evidences through different channels and translated the contents in different languages.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Carlotte Kiekens
- Montecatone Rehabilitation Institute SpA, Imola, Bologna, Italy.,University Hospitals Leuven - KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | | | - Julia P Engkasan
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Rolf Frischknecht
- Honorary Consultant in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Center of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Francesca Gimigliano
- Department of Mental and Physical Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy
| | - Frane Grubisic
- Department of Rheumatology, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University Hospital Center "Sestre Milosrdnice", Zagreb, Croatia
| | | | | | - Elena Ilieva
- Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria
| | | | | | - Thorsten Meyer
- School of Public Health, University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany
| | - Aydan Oral
- Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | | | - Farooq A Rathore
- Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, PNS Shifa Hospital, DHA II, Karachi, Pakistan.,Bahria University Medical and Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan.,Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | - Stefano Negrini
- IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.,Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan "La Statale", Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|