Endoscopic sphincterotomy for adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction

BACKGROUND

The sphincter of Oddi comprises a muscular complex encircling the distal part of the common bile duct and the pancreatic duct regulating the outflow from these ducts. Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction refers to the abnormal opening and closing of the muscular valve, which impairs the circulation of bile and pancreatic juices.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with a placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, administered orally or endoscopically, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.

SEARCH METHODS

We used extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 16 May 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials assessing any type of endoscopic sphincterotomy versus placebo drug, sham operation, or any pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination, or a different type of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults diagnosed with sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods and Review Manager to prepare the review. Our primary outcomes were: proportion of participants without successful treatment; proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events; and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were: all-cause mortality; proportion of participants with one or more non-serious adverse events; length of hospital stay; and proportion of participants without improvement in liver function tests. We used the outcome data at the longest follow-up and the random-effects model for our primary analyses. We assessed the risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We planned to present the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR). We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included four randomised clinical trials, including 433 participants. Trials were published between 1989 and 2015. The trial participants had sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Two trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Japan. One was a multicentre trial conducted in seven US centres, and the remaining three were single-centre trials. One trial used a two-stage randomisation, resulting in two comparisons. The number of participants in the four trials ranged from 47 to 214 (median 86), with a median age of 45 years, and the mean proportion of males was 49%. The follow-up duration ranged from one year to four years after the end of treatment. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest to our review. The trials provided data for the comparisons and outcomes below, in conformity with our review protocol. The certainty of evidence for all the outcomes was very low. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.66; 3 trials, 340 participants; follow-up range 1 to 4 years); serious adverse events (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Physical scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -3.84 to 1.84; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), health-related quality of life (Mental scale) (MD -1.00, 95% CI -4.16 to 2.16; 1 trial, 214 participants; follow-up 1 year), and no improvement in liver function test (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.26; 1 trial, 47 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilationmay have little to no effect on serious adverse events (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.15; 1 trial, 91 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy Endoscopic sphincterotomy versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy may have little to no effect on treatment success (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.31; 1 trial, 99 participants; follow-up 1 year), but the evidence is very uncertain. Funding One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial was funded by a foundation (the National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, NIDDK), and two trials seemed to be funded by the local health institutes or universities where the investigators worked. We did not identify any ongoing randomised clinical trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence from the trials included in this review, we do not know if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus dual endoscopic sphincterotomy increases, reduces, or makes no difference to the number of people with treatment success; if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham or versus endoscopic papillary balloon dilation increases, reduces, or makes no difference to serious adverse events; or if endoscopic sphincterotomy versus sham improves, worsens, or makes no difference to health-related quality of life and liver function tests in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Evidence on the effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy compared with sham, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation,or dual endoscopic sphincterotomyon all-cause mortality, non-serious adverse events, and length of hospital stay is lacking. We found no trials comparing endoscopic sphincterotomy versus a placebo drug or versus any other pharmaceutical treatment, alone or in combination. All four trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. We lack randomised clinical trials assessing clinically and patient-relevant outcomes to demonstrate the effects of endoscopic sphincterotomy in adults with biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction.

LipiFlow for the treatment of dry eye disease

BACKGROUND

Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is the most common underlying cause of dry eye disease (DED). MGD leads to pathological alteration of the composition or quantity of meibum, or both, which subsequently results in tear evaporation and the typical signs and symptoms associated with DED. The LipiFlow Thermal Pulsation System (LipiFlow) is a medical device used to treat MGD in office; however, it is unclear if LipiFlow can outperform other DED treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of LipiFlow for treating DED signs and symptoms and the safety of LipiFlow compared with sham or other available treatments for MGD in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Eyes and Vision Information Specialist searched the electronic databases for randomized controlled trials. There were no restrictions on language or date of publication. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, including the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2022, Issue 6), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase.com, PubMed, LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database), ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) electronic databases. We also examined the reference lists of identified trials, review articles, and guidelines for information about relevant trials that may not have been identified by our search strategy. We contacted investigators regarding ongoing trials. The last database search was performed on 24 October 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies conducted in adults (over 18 years of age) with DED or MGD as defined by the primary trial investigators. We imposed no restrictions on race, ethnicity, or sex. We considered trials involving contact lens wearers if they were equally represented between groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We applied standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 trials that randomized a total of 1155 participants (28 to 236 participants randomized per study). Six trials were conducted in the USA, three in China, two in Thailand, one in France, and one in Italy. Eight trials were of single-center design, while four trials were of multicenter design; one trial did not report the number of participating centers. Study characteristics The study population of the included trials was 66% female (range 48% to 80%), with an age range of 19 to 86 years. LipiFlow, used as a stand-alone intervention, was compared with basic warm compresses in five studies, thermostatic device in five studies, oral intervention in one trial, and topical dry eye medications in one trial. LipiFlow was also evaluated together with eyelid hygiene product versus eyelid hygiene products alone in one trial. Findings Five trials compared LipiFlow with a basic warm compress applied for varying durations and frequencies during the trial period; only one of these trials combined a warm compress with eyelid massage. Analyzing symptom scores by different questionnaires (Ocular Surface Disease Index [OSDI] and Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness [SPEED]) yielded conflicting evidence of a difference in symptoms between LipiFlow and basic warm compresses after four weeks. There was no evidence of a difference in meibomian gland expression, meibum quality, or tear breakup time when comparing LipiFlow with basic warm compresses. Another five trials compared LipiFlow with thermostatic devices. Analysis of symptom scores at four weeks showed that thermostatic devices had reduced OSDI scores by a mean difference (MD) of 4.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23 to 7.95; I2 = 0, P = 0.007; 553 participants; very low certainty evidence) as compared with LipiFlow. When we compared LipiFlow plus eyelid hygiene with eyelid hygiene alone, there was no evidence of difference in signs or symptoms at any time point evaluated. Only one trial compared LipiFlow with a topical DED medication (lifitegrast 5%). The single-trial estimate suggested that 5% lifitegrast may increase meibomian gland expression scores compared with LipiFlow at day 42 (MD -1.21, 95% CI -2.37 to -0.05; 50 participants; low certainty evidence) by using a meibomian gland expression scale of 0 to 8. One trial compared LipiFlow with an oral intervention (doxycycline), finding that LipiFlow may result in significantly better SPEED scores than doxycycline at three months (MD -4.00, 95% CI -7.33 to -0.67; 24 participants; very low certainty evidence). No other significant differences in signs or symptoms were found between LipiFlow and doxycycline at three months. We did not find any other statistically significant differences in symptoms or signs for any other analysis performed in this review at the one- to four-week time point. Adverse events No trial reported any intervention-related, vision-threatening adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

LipiFlow performs similarly to other commonly used DED treatments with regard to DED signs and symptoms. The best available evidence was deemed to have a high level of bias, leading to low or very low certainty evidence. Additional research with adequate masking, a standardized testing methodology, and a sample representative of the MGD population is therefore needed before any firm conclusions can be drawn regarding comparative benefits and harms.

Early versus late tracheostomy in critically ill COVID-19 patients

BACKGROUND

The role of early tracheostomy as an intervention for critically ill COVID-19 patients is unclear. Previous reports have described prolonged intensive care stays and difficulty weaning from mechanical ventilation in critically ill COVID-19 patients, particularly in those developing acute respiratory distress syndrome. Pre-pandemic evidence on the benefits of early tracheostomy is conflicting but suggests shorter hospital stays and lower mortality rates compared to late tracheostomy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of early tracheostomy compared to late tracheostomy in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, which comprises CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and medRxiv, as well as Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index) and WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease to identify completed and ongoing studies without language restrictions. We conducted the searches on 14 June 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSI) evaluating early tracheostomy compared to late tracheostomy during SARS-CoV-2 infection in critically ill adults irrespective of gender, ethnicity, or setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. To assess risk of bias in included studies, we used the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for NRSIs. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence for outcomes of our prioritized categories: mortality, clinical status, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay. As the timing of tracheostomy was very heterogeneous among the included studies, we applied GRADE only to studies that defined early tracheostomy as 10 days or less, which was chosen according to clinical relevance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one RCT with 150 participants diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and 24 NRSIs with 6372 participants diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. All participants were admitted to the ICU, orally intubated and mechanically ventilated. The RCT was a multicenter, parallel, single-blinded study conducted in Sweden. Of the 24 NRSIs, which were mostly conducted in high- and middle-income countries, eight had a prospective design and 16 a retrospective design. We did not find any ongoing studies. RCT-based evidence We judged risk of bias for the RCT to be of low or some concerns regarding randomization and measurement of the outcome. Early tracheostomy may result in little to no difference in overall mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.29; RD 67 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 178 fewer to 108 more; 1 study, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). As an indicator of improvement of clinical status, early tracheostomy may result in little to no difference in duration to liberation from invasive mechanical ventilation (MD 1.50 days fewer, 95%, CI 5.74 days fewer to 2.74 days more; 1 study, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). As an indicator of worsening clinical status, early tracheostomy may result in little to no difference in the incidence of adverse events of any grade (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.13; RD 47 fewer per 1000, 95% CI 164 fewer to 102 more; 1 study, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence); little to no difference in the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.23 to 5.20; RD 3 more per 1000, 95% CI 30 fewer to 162 more; 1 study, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies reported need for renal replacement therapy. Early tracheostomy may result in little benefit to no difference in ICU length of stay (MD 0.5 days fewer, 95% CI 5.34 days fewer to 4.34 days more; 1 study, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). NRSI-based evidence We considered risk of bias for NRSIs to be critical because of possible confounding, study participant enrollment into the studies, intervention classification and potentially systematic errors in the measurement of outcomes. We are uncertain whether early tracheostomy (≤ 10 days) increases or decreases overall mortality (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.00; RD 143 more per 1000, 95% CI 174 less to 1218 more; I2 = 79%; 2 studies, 719 participants) or duration to liberation from mechanical ventilation (MD 1.98 days fewer, 95% CI 0.16 days fewer to 4.12 more; 1 study, 50 participants), because we graded the certainty of evidence as very low. Three NRSIs reported ICU length of stay for 519 patients with early tracheostomy (≤ 10 days) as a median value, which we could not include in the meta-analyses. We are uncertain whether early tracheostomy (≤ 10 days) increases or decreases the ICU length of stay, because we graded the certainty of evidence as very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low-certainty evidence that early tracheostomy may result in little to no difference in overall mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation compared with late tracheostomy. In terms of clinical improvement, early tracheostomy may result in little to no difference in duration to liberation from mechanical ventilation compared with late tracheostomy. We are not certain about the impact of early tracheostomy on clinical worsening in terms of the incidence of adverse events, need for renal replacement therapy, ventilator-associated pneumonia, or the length of stay in the ICU. Future RCTs should provide additional data on the benefits and harms of early tracheostomy for defined main outcomes of COVID-19 research, as well as of comparable diseases, especially for different population subgroups to reduce clinical heterogeneity, and report a longer observation period. Then it would be possible to draw conclusions regarding which patient groups might benefit from early intervention. Furthermore, validated scoring systems for more accurate predictions of the need for prolonged mechanical ventilation should be developed and used in new RCTs to ensure safer indication and patient safety. High-quality (prospectively registered) NRSIs should be conducted in the future to provide valuable answers to clinical questions. This could enable us to draw more reliable conclusions about the potential benefits and harms of early tracheostomy in critically ill COVID-19 patients.

EHR-based cohort assessment for multicenter RCTs: a fast and flexible model for identifying potential study sites

Objective

The Recruitment Innovation Center (RIC), partnering with the Trial Innovation Network and institutions in the National Institutes of Health-sponsored Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program, aimed to develop a service line to retrieve study population estimates from electronic health record (EHR) systems for use in selecting enrollment sites for multicenter clinical trials. Our goal was to create and field-test a low burden, low tech, and high-yield method.

Materials and Methods

In building this service line, the RIC strove to complement, rather than replace, CTSA hubs’ existing cohort assessment tools. For each new EHR cohort request, we work with the investigator to develop a computable phenotype algorithm that targets the desired population. CTSA hubs run the phenotype query and return results using a standardized survey. We provide a comprehensive report to the investigator to assist in study site selection.

Results

From 2017 to 2020, the RIC developed and socialized 36 phenotype-dependent cohort requests on behalf of investigators. The average response rate to these requests was 73%.

Discussion

Achieving enrollment goals in a multicenter clinical trial requires that researchers identify study sites that will provide sufficient enrollment. The fast and flexible method the RIC has developed, with CTSA feedback, allows hubs to query their EHR using a generalizable, vetted phenotype algorithm to produce reliable counts of potentially eligible study participants.

Conclusion

The RIC’s EHR cohort assessment process for evaluating sites for multicenter trials has been shown to be efficient and helpful. The model may be replicated for use by other programs.

A prospective comparison of cancer clinical trial availability and enrollment among adolescents/young adults treated at an adult cancer hospital or affiliated children's hospital

BACKGROUND

Low cancer clinical trial (CCT) enrollment may contribute to survival disparities affecting adolescents and young adults (AYAs) (ages 15-39 years). The objective of this study was to evaluate whether differences in CCT availability related to treatment site could explain the low CCT enrollment.

METHODS

This prospective, observational cohort study was conducted at an academic children's hospital and its affiliated but geographically separated adult cancer hospital within a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. For consecutive, newly diagnosed AYA patients, it was determined whether an appropriate CCT existed nationally, was available at the treatment site, and was used for enrollment. Proportions of AYAs in these categories were compared between sites using the chi-square test.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-two consecutive AYA patients were included from the children's hospital (n = 68; ages 15-20 years) and the adult cancer hospital (n = 84; ages 18-39 years). Although there was no difference in CCT existence for individual AYA patients by site (children's hospital [36 of 68 patients; 52.9%] vs adult cancer hospital [45 of 84 patients; 53.6%]; P = .938), CCT availability was significantly lower at the adult cancer hospital (14 of 84 patients [16.7%] vs 30 of 68 [44.1%] at the children's hospital; P < .001). The proportion of AYAs enrolled was low at both sites (8 of 68 patients [11.8%] vs 6 of 84 patients [7.1%], respectively; P = .327). Fewer existing CCTs were available at the adult cancer hospital (4 of 27 patients [14.8%] vs 8 of 14 patients [57.1%], respectively), and those were directed toward solid tumors and new agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve low CCT enrollment among AYAs should be differentiated by treatment site. In the adult setting, these efforts should be aimed at improving CCT availability by overcoming site-level barriers to opening existing CCTs.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Latin America: Implementation in Research and Role in Emerging HTA Systems

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to demonstrate the value of interventions and support health technology assessment (HTA).

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this work was to analyze trends regarding PROs in Latin America (LatAm), highlight challenges in the application of PROs in this region, and suggest solutions.

METHODS

A team of researchers with expertise in PROs conducted a nonsystematic PubMed literature search pertaining to the use of PROs in LatAm. The experts also drew on their experience working with PROs to assess the application of PROs in LatAm.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded more than 4000 publications, with an increasing publication rate in recent years. PROs are being used in LatAm in various study types: instrument validation, phase III international clinical trials, health service research. A large Inter-American Development Bank study demonstrates the growing importance of PROs in the region. The growth in local value sets for the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire in LatAm reflects the regional emergence of HTA systems. Operational challenges relate to ensuring the use of good-quality questionnaires that, at a minimum, have undergone appropriate cultural adaptation and ideally have established psychometric properties.

CONCLUSIONS

PROs are increasingly important in LatAm. Future efforts should aim to strengthen the operational and research infrastructure around PROs in the region. Innovation should be encouraged, including studying alternative methods of eliciting health utilities for economic evaluation. A wider scope around PRO uses for decision making by HTA bodies is an international trend with potential positive prospects in LatAm.

Bone graft substitutes for the treatment of traumatic fractures of the extremities

HEALTH POLITICAL AND SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND: Bone graft substitutes are increasingly being used as supplements to standard care or as alternative to bone grafts in the treatment of traumatic fractures.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of bone graft substitutes for the treatment of traumatic fractures as well as the ethical, social and legal implications of their use are the main research questions addressed.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in electronic medical databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE etc.) in December 2009. Randomised controlled trials (RCT), where applicable also containing relevant health economic evaluations and publications addressing the ethical, social and legal aspects of using bone graft substitutes for fracture treatment were included in the analysis. After assessment of study quality the information synthesis of the medical data was performed using metaanalysis, the synthesis of the health economic data was performed descriptively.

RESULTS

14 RCT were included in the medical analysis, and two in the heath economic evaluation. No relevant publications on the ethical, social and legal implications of the bone graft substitute use were found. In the RCT on fracture treatment with bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) versus standard care without bone grafting (RCT with an elevated high risk of bias) there was a significant difference in favour of BMP-2 for several outcome measures. The RCT of calcium phosphate (CaP) cement and bone marrow-based composite materials versus autogenous bone grafts (RCT with a high risk of bias) revealed significant differences in favour of bone graft substitutes for some outcome measures. Regarding the other bone graft substitutes, almost all comparisons demonstrated no significant difference. The use of BMP-2 in addition to standard care without bone grafting led in the study to increased treatment costs considering all patients with traumatic open fractures. However, cost savings through the additional use of BMP-2 were calculated in a patient subgroup with high-grade open fractures (Gustilo-Anderson grade IIIB). Cost-effectiveness for BMP-2 versus standard care with autologous bone grafts as well as for other bone graft substitutes in fracture treatment has not been determined yet.

DISCUSSION

Although there were some significant differences in favour of BMP-2, due to the overall poor quality of the studies the evidence can only be interpreted as suggestive for efficacy. In the case of CaP cements and bone marrow-based bone substitute materials, the evidence is only weakly suggestive for efficacy. From an overall economic perspective, the transferability of the results of the health economic evaluations to the current situation in Germany is limited.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence is insufficient to evaluate entirely the use of different bone graft substitutes for fracture treatment. From a medical point of view, BMP-2 is a viable alternative for treatment of open fractures of the tibia, especially in cases where bone grafting is not possible. Autologous bone grafting is preferable comparing to the use of OP-1. Possible advantages of CaP cements and composites containing bone marrow over autogenous bone grafting should be taken into account in clinical decision making. The use of the hydroxyapatite material and allograft bone chips compared to autologous bone grafts cannot be recommended. From a health economic perspective, the use of BMP-2 in addition to standard care without bone grafting is recommended as cost-saving in patients with high-grade open fractures (Gustilo-Anderson grade IIIB). Based on the current evidence no further recommendations can be made regarding the use of bone graft substitutes for the treatment of fractures. To avoid legal implications, use of bone graft substitutes outside their approved indications should be avoided.

Prevention of alcohol misuse among children, youths and young adults

BACKGROUND

Despite many activities to prevent risky alcohol consumption among adolescents and young adults there is an increase of alcohol intoxications in the group of ten to twenty year old juveniles.

OBJECTIVES

This report gives an overview about the recent literature as well as the German federal prevention system regarding activities concerning behavioral and policy prevention of risky alcohol consumption among children, adolescents and young adults. Furthermore, effective components of prevention activities are identified and the efficiency and efficacy of ongoing prevention programs is evaluated.

METHODS

A systematic literature review is done in 34 databases using Bool'sche combinations of the key words alcohol, prevention, treatment, children, adolescents and young adults.

RESULTS

401 studies were found and 59 studies were selected for the health technology assessment (HTA). Most of the studies are done in USA, nine in Germany. A family strengthening program, personalized computer based intervention at schools, colleges and universities, brief motivational interventions and policy elements like increase of prices and taxes proved effective.

DISCUSSION

Among the 59 studies there are three meta-analyses, 15 reviews, 17 randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 18 cohort studies. Despite the overall high quality of the study design, many of them have methodological weaknesses (missing randomization, missing or too short follow-ups, not clearly defined measurement parameters). The transferability of US-results to the German context is problematic. Only a few prevention activities reach a sustainable reduction of frequency and/or amount of alcohol consumption.

CONCLUSION

The HTA-report shows the need to develop specific and target group focused prevention activities for the German situation. Essential for that is the definition of target goals (reduction of consumption, change of behaviour) as well as the definition and empirical validation of risky alcohol consumption. The efficacy of prevention activities should be proven before they are launched. At present activities for the reduction or prevention of risky alcohol consumption are not sufficiently evaluated in Germany concerning their sustainable efficacy.

Effectiveness of programmes as part of primary prevention demonstrated on the example of cardiovascular diseases and the metabolic syndrome

Background

The HTA-report (HTA = Health Technology Assessment) deals with the primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus type 2. In 2009 approximately 356,000 people died in Germany due to cardiovascular diseases. According to estimations about 6.3 million people are suffering from diabetes mellitus type 2. The interventions that are subsidized by the public health insurance are mainly focused on sufficient physical activities, healthy nutrition, stress management and the reduction of the consumption of addictive drugs and luxury food.

Objectives

Which lifestyle-related measures and/or programmes for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases and of the metabolic syndrome are effective? To what extent will the health status be improved by these offers? To what extent will existing health resources and skills be strengthened by these offers? Are there any differences regarding the effectiveness among the interventions with respect to different settings or subgroups?

Which lifestyle-related interventions and/or programmes for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases and of the metabolic syndrome are sustainable and cost-effective? Which outcome parameters are in the view of the contributors decisive for the evaluation of the effectiveness? In the view of the contributor are there different values between the outcome parameters? In the view of the payers and other actors are there different values between the outcome parameters?

Which ethical and juridical factors have to be considered? Which social and/or socio-economic parameters influence the use of the services and effectiveness?

Methods

A systematic literature research is done in 35 databases. For the period 2005 to 2010, reviews, epidemiological and clinical studies as well as economical evaluations which deal with primary prevention programmes regarding cardiovascular diseases or the metabolic syndrome are included.

Results

44 publications meet the inclusion criteria. These studies confirm the effectiveness of the primary prevention programmes. Physical activity programs seem to have a stronger effect than nutrition programmes. Psychological programmes prove as well effectiveness, if they include cognitive behaviour therapy. The identified economical studies indicate that programmes for cardiovascular prevention can be conducted cost-effectively. Interventions that focus on the general population turn out to be particularly cost-effective and sustainable.

Discussion

There is a wide range of primary preventive effective lifestyle-related interventions with high evidence. The outcomes and results are consistent with the recommendations of the two identified evidence-based guidelines regarding the recommendations on lifestyle and healthy nutrition. Furthermore, the cost-effectiveness of primary prevention services is proven. With regard to the economical studies it is however worth noting that this result is based on very few publications. The transferability has to be critically assessed as the studies mainly originate from the American health system.

Conclusion

On the whole a comprehensive setting approach with educative, somatic, psychosocial and activity therapeutic components is recommended. The sustainability of a prevention intervention must be ensured from programme to programme. Long-term studies are necessary to make valid statements regarding the sustainable effectiveness: There is an essential deficit in the current practiced evaluation of the use of primary prevention services provided by the health insurance – mainly regarding the comprehensive setting approach – regarding the evidence-based evaluation of the prescribed preventive interventions. With regard to the ethical, social and economical evaluation the research situation is deficient. The situation has to be particularly analyzed for the socially deprived and one has to respond to their specific needs for prevention.

Informative value of Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) in Health Technology Assessment (HTA)

Background

“Patient-Reported Outcome” (PRO) is used as an umbrella term for different concepts for measuring subjectively perceived health status e. g. as treatment effects. Their common characteristic is, that the appraisal of the health status is reported by the patient himself. In order to describe the informative value of PRO in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) first an overview of concepts, classifications and methods of measurement is given. The overview is complemented by an empirical analysis of clinical trials and HTA-reports on rheumatoid arthritis and breast cancer in order to report on type, frequency and consequences of PRO used in these documents.

Methods

For both issues systematic reviews of the literature have been performed. The search for methodological literature covers the publication period from 1990 to 2009, the search for clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis and breast cancer covers the period 2005 to 2009. Both searches were performed in the medical databases of the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information (DIMDI). The search for HTA-reports and methodological papers of HTA-agencies was performed in the CRD-Databases (CRD = Centre for Reviews and Dissemination) and by handsearching the websites of INAHTA member agencies (INAHTA = International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment). For all issues specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCT) was assessed by a modified version of the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. For the methodological part information extraction from the literature is structured by the report’s chapters, for the empirical part data extraction sheets were constructed. All information is summarized in a qualitative manner.

Results

Concerning the methodological issues the literature search retrieved 158 documents (87 documents related to definition or classification, 125 documents related to operationalisation of PRO). For the empirical analyses 225 RCT (rheumatoid arthritis: 77; breast cancer: 148) and 40 HTA-reports and method papers were found.

The analysis of the methodological literature confirms the role of PRO as an umbrella term for a variety of different concepts. The newest classification system facilitates the description of PRO measures by construct, target population and the method of measurement. Steps of operationalisation involve defining a conceptual framework, instrument development, exploration of measurement properties or, possibly, the modification of existing instruments.

Seven out of 59 RCT analysing the effects of antibody therapy for rheumatoid arthritis define PRO as the primary endpoint, 38 trials utilize composite measures (ACR, DAS) and ten trials report clinical or radiological parameters as the primary endpoint. Six out of 123 chemotherapy trials for breast cancer define PRO as the primary endpoint, while 98 trials report clinical endpoints (survival, tumour response, progression) in their primary analyses. Discrepancies in the number of trials result from inaccurate specifications of endpoints in the publications. This distribution is reflected in the HTA-reports: while almost all reports on rheumatoid arthritis refer to PRO, this is only the case in about half of the reports on breast cancer.

Conclusions

As definition and classification of PRO are concerned, coherent concepts are found in the literature. Their operationalisation and implementation must be guided by scientific principles. The type and frequency of PRO used in clinical trials largely depend on the disease analysed. The HTA-community seems to pursue the utilization of PRO proactively – in case of missing data the need for further research is stated.

Ethics and observational studies in medical research: various rules in a common framework

BACKGROUND

Research ethics have become universal in their principles through international agreements. The standardization of regulations facilitates the internationalization of research concerning drugs. However, in so-called observational studies (i.e. from data collected retrospectively or prospectively, obtained without any additional therapy or monitoring procedure) the modalities used for applying the main principles vary from one country to another. This situation may entail problems for the conduct of multi-centric international studies, as well as for the publication of results if the authors and editors come from countries governed by different regulations. In particular, several French observational studies were rejected or retracted by US peer-reviewed journals, because their protocols have not been submitted to an Institutional Review Board/Independent Ethics Committee (IRB/IEC).

METHODS

National legislation case analysis.

RESULTS

In accordance with European regulation, French observational studies from data obtained without any additional therapy or monitoring procedure, do not need the approval of an IRB/IEC. Nevertheless, these studies are neither exempt from scientific opinion nor from ethical and legal authorization.

CONCLUSION

We wish to demonstrate through the study of this example that different bodies of law can provide equivalent levels of protection that respect the same ethical principles. Our purpose in writing this article was to encourage public bodies, scientific journals and researchers to gain a better understanding of the various sets of specific national regulations and to speak a common language.