Novel Clinical Trial Designs to Improve the Efficiency of Research

Prophylactic phenylephrine infusion versus treatment with vasopressor bolus as needed during non-urgent cesarean delivery and neonatal acidemia: a retrospective cohort study (2016-2021)

INTRODUCTION

Prophylactic vasopressor administration reduces spinal hypotension during cesarean delivery, however the effects of vasopressor administration on neonatal acidemia remain uncertain. We examined the occurrence of neonatal acidemia in the setting of non-urgent cesarean delivery and compared outcomes between cases receiving prophylactic phenylephrine infusion versus cases treated with boluses of phenylephrine.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study with ethical approval, comparing non-urgent cesarean delivery cases performed under spinal anesthesia (2016 to 2021), receiving either prophylactic phenylephrine infusion or boluses as needed. Data were collected from anesthesia and labor ward electronic medical records. Records with missing pH or missing blood pressure data were excluded. The independent variable was prophylactic phenylephrine administration, a strategy implemented following international recommendations in 2018. The main outcome was neonatal acidemia, defined as umbilical artery pH < 7.1. The secondary outcome was maternal hypotension, defined as at least one systolic blood pressure (SBP) measurement below 100 mmHg or below 80% baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 4392 patients were included in the final analysis; 1318 (30.0%) received prophylactic phenylephrine infusion. Neonatal acidemia (umbilical artery pH < 7.1) occurred in 28 (2.1%) cases receiving prophylactic phenylephrine versus 50 (1.6%) treated with boluses as needed (p = 0.188). Prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was not associated with occurrence of neonatal acidemia (aOR 0.83; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.33, p = 0.435). Prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was associated with a reduced spinal hypotension rate when defined as SBP < 100 mmHg (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.57; p < 0.001), with similar results when hypotension was defined as a drop below 80% or 90% of baseline SBP.

CONCLUSION

In this pragmatic study, prophylactic phenylephrine infusion was associated with a reduction in maternal spinal hypotension, but not reduced neonatal acidemia.

Optimizing accrual to a large-scale, clinically integrated randomized trial in anesthesiology: A 2-year analysis of recruitment

BACKGROUND

Performing large randomized trials in anesthesiology is often challenging and costly. The clinically integrated randomized trial is characterized by simplified logistics embedded into routine clinical practice, enabling ease and efficiency of recruitment, offering an opportunity for clinicians to conduct large, high-quality randomized trials under low cost. Our aims were to (1) demonstrate the feasibility of the clinically integrated trial design in a high-volume anesthesiology practice and (2) assess whether trial quality improvement interventions led to more balanced accrual among study arms and improved trial compliance over time.

METHODS

This is an interim analysis of recruitment to a cluster-randomized trial investigating three nerve block approaches for mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction: paravertebral block (arm 1), paravertebral plus interpectoral plane blocks (arm 2), and serratus anterior plane plus interpectoral plane blocks (arm 3). We monitored accrual and consent rates, clinician compliance with the randomized treatment, and availability of outcome data. Assessment after the initial year of implementation showed a slight imbalance in study arms suggesting areas for improvement in trial compliance. Specific improvement interventions included increasing the frequency of communication with the consenting staff and providing direct feedback to clinician investigators about their individual recruitment patterns. We assessed overall accrual rates and tested for differences in accrual, consent, and compliance rates pre- and post-improvement interventions.

RESULTS

Overall recruitment was extremely high, accruing close to 90% of the eligible population. In the pre-intervention period, there was evidence of bias in the proportion of patients being accrued and receiving the monthly block, with higher rates in arm 3 (90%) compared to arms 1 (81%) and 2 (79%, p = 0.021). In contrast, in the post-intervention period, there was no statistically significant difference between groups (p = 0.8). Eligible for randomization rate increased from 89% in the pre-intervention period to 95% in the post-intervention period (difference 5.7%; 95% confidence interval = 2.2%-9.4%, p = 0.002). Consent rate increased from 95% to 98% (difference of 3.7%; 95% confidence interval = 1.1%-6.3%; p = 0.004). Compliance with the randomized nerve block approach was maintained at close to 100% and availability of primary outcome data was 100%.

CONCLUSION

The clinically integrated randomized trial design enables rapid trial accrual with a high participant compliance rate in a high-volume anesthesiology practice. Continuous monitoring of accrual, consent, and compliance rates is necessary to maintain and improve trial conduct and reduce potential biases. This trial methodology serves as a template for the implementation of other large, low-cost randomized trials in anesthesiology.

Long-term effects on clinical event, mental health, and related outcomes of CPAP for obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review of long-term health outcomes of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) use in adults with obstructive sleep apnea.

METHODS

We updated prior systematic reviews with searches in multiple databases through January 3, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies that reported prespecified long-term (mostly > 1 year) health outcomes. We assessed risk of bias, conducted meta-analyses, and evaluated strength of evidence.

RESULTS

We found 38 eligible studies (16 trials, 22 observational). All conclusions were of low strength of evidence given study and data limitations. RCTs found no evidence of effect of CPAP on mortality (summary effect size [ES] 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66, 1.21); inclusion of adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies yields an association with reduced risk of death (ES 0.57; 95% CI 0.44, 0.73). RCTs found no evidence of effects of CPAP for cardiovascular death (ES 0.99; 95% CI 0.64, 1.53), stroke (ES 0.99; 95% CI 0.73, 1.35), myocardial infarction (ES 1.05; 95% CI 0.78, 1.41), incident atrial fibrillation (ES 0.89; 95% CI 0.48, 1.63), or composite cardiovascular outcomes (all statistically nonsignificant). RCTs found no evidence of effects for incident diabetes (ES 1.02; 95% CI 0.69, 1.51) or accidents (all nonsignificant) and no clinically significant effects on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, or cognitive function.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether CPAP use for obstructive sleep apnea affects long-term health outcomes remains largely unanswered. RCTs and nonrandomized comparative studies are inconsistent regarding the effect of CPAP on mortality. Current studies are underpowered, with relatively short duration follow-up and methodological limitations.

CITATION

Balk EM, Adam GP, Cao W, Bhuma MR, D'Ambrosio C, Trikalinos TA. Long-term effects on clinical event, mental health, and related outcomes of CPAP for obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review. J Clin Sleep Med. 2024;20(6):895-909.

Development of a conceptual framework for defining trial efficiency

BACKGROUND

Globally, there is a growing focus on efficient trials, yet numerous interpretations have emerged, suggesting a significant heterogeneity in understanding "efficiency" within the trial context. Therefore in this study, we aimed to dissect the multifaceted nature of trial efficiency by establishing a comprehensive conceptual framework for its definition.

OBJECTIVES

To collate diverse perspectives regarding trial efficiency and to achieve consensus on a conceptual framework for defining trial efficiency.

METHODS

From July 2022 to July 2023, we undertook a literature review to identify various terms that have been used to define trial efficiency. We then conducted a modified e-Delphi study, comprising an exploratory open round and a subsequent scoring round to refine and validate the identified items. We recruited a wide range of experts in the global trial community including trialists, funders, sponsors, journal editors and members of the public. Consensus was defined as items rated "without disagreement", measured by the inter-percentile range adjusted for symmetry through the UCLA/RAND approach.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight studies were identified from a literature review, from which we extracted nine terms related to trial efficiency. We then used review findings as exemplars in the Delphi open round. Forty-nine international experts were recruited to the e-Delphi panel. Open round responses resulted in the refinement of the initial nine terms, which were consequently included in the scoring round. We obtained consensus on all nine items: 1) four constructs that collectively define trial efficiency containing scientific efficiency, operational efficiency, statistical efficiency and economic efficiency; and 2) five essential building blocks for efficient trial comprising trial design, trial process, infrastructure, superstructure, and stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first attempt to dissect the concept of trial efficiency into theoretical constructs. Having an agreed definition will allow better trial implementation and facilitate effective communication and decision-making across stakeholders. We also identified essential building blocks that are the cornerstones of an efficient trial. In this pursuit of understanding, we are not only unravelling the complexities of trial efficiency but also laying the groundwork for evaluating the efficiency of an individual trial or a trial system in the future.

An alternating-intervention pilot trial on the impact of an informational handout on patient-reported outcomes and follow-up after lung cancer screening

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality; however, poor understanding of results may impact patient experience and follow-up. We sought to determine whether an informational handout accompanying LCS results can improve patient-reported outcomes and adherence to follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective alternating intervention pilot trial of a handout to accompany LCS results delivery.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing LCS in a multisite program over a 6-month period received a mailing containing either: 1) a standardized form letter of LCS results (control) or 2) the LCS results letter and the handout (intervention).

INTERVENTION

A two-sided informational handout on commonly asked questions after LCS created through iterative mixed-methods evaluation with both LCS patients and providers.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes of 1)patient understanding of LCS results, 2)correct identification of next steps in screening, and 3)patient distress were measured through survey. Adherence to recommended follow-up after LCS was determined through chart review. Outcomes were compared between the intervention and control group using generalized estimating equations.

RESULTS

389 patients were eligible and enrolled with survey responses from 230 participants (59% response rate). We found no differences in understanding of results, identification of next steps in follow-up or distress but did find higher levels of knowledge and understanding on questions assessing individual components of LCS in the intervention group. Follow-up adherence was overall similar between the two arms, though was higher in the intervention group among those with positive findings (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in self-reported outcomes between the groups or overall follow-up adherence. Those receiving the intervention did report greater understanding and knowledge of key LCS components, and those with positive results had a higher rate of follow-up. This may represent a feasible component of a multi-level intervention to address knowledge and follow-up for LCS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05265897.

Clinical trials are becoming more complex: a machine learning analysis of data from over 16,000 trials

The past decade has seen substantial innovation in clinical trials, including new trial formats, endpoints, and others. Also there have been regulatory changes, increasing competitive pressures and other external factors which impact clinical trials. In parallel, trial timelines have increased and success rates remain stubbornly low. This has led many observers to question whether clinical trials have become overly complex and if this complexity is always needed. Here we present a large-scale analysis of protocols and other data from over 16,000 trials. Using a machine learning algorithm, we automatically assessed key features of these trials, such as number of endpoints, number of inclusion-exclusion criteria and others. Using a regression analysis we combined these features into a new metric, the Trial Complexity Score, which correlates with overall clinical trial duration. Looking at this score across different clinical phases and therapeutic areas we see substantial increases over time, suggesting that clinical trials are indeed becoming more complex. We discuss drivers of increasing trial complexity, necessary or helpful ('good') complexity versus unnecessary ('bad') complexity, and we explore mechanisms of how sponsors of clinical trials can reduce trial complexity where appropriate.

Innovative designs for trials informing the care of cardiac surgical patients: Part II

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines advances in clinical trial methodologies relevant to cardiac anesthesia. It focuses on innovative approaches, including factorial randomization, composite outcomes, and cluster randomized trials, which enhance the efficiency, practical relevance, and generalizability of trial outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Factorial randomization is becoming popular because the approach allows investigators to simultaneously evaluate two or more interventions. Furthermore, factorial designs can evaluate interactions among treatments which is highly relevant information that cannot be obtained from separate trials. Composite outcomes are also increasingly utilized, combining multiple individual outcomes into a single measure, which increases statistical power and can better represent relevant physiology. Designing valid composites requires careful consideration of component outcome severity and incidence. Cluster randomized trials, including stepped wedge and multiple crossover designs, address the challenges of group-level effects and shared environments.

SUMMARY

The evolution of clinical trial designs is marked by a shift towards methodologies that enhance efficiency and provide more nuanced insights into treatment effects. These include factorial designs for simultaneous intervention assessment, composite outcomes for comprehensive physiological representation, and cluster trials for group-level effect analysis. Such advancements are shaping the future of clinical research, making it more relevant, efficient, and broadly applicable.

Long-term health outcomes for patients with obstructive sleep apnea: placing the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality report in context-a multisociety commentary

This multisociety commentary critically examines the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) final report and systematic review on long-term health outcomes in obstructive sleep apnea. The AHRQ report was commissioned by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and particularly focused on the long-term patient-centered outcomes of continuous positive airway pressure, the variability of sleep-disordered breathing metrics, and the validity of these metrics as surrogate outcomes. This commentary raises concerns regarding the AHRQ report conclusions and their potential implications for policy decisions. A major concern expressed in this commentary is that the AHRQ report inadequately acknowledges the benefits of continuous positive airway pressure for several established, long-term clinically important outcomes including excessive sleepiness, motor vehicle accidents, and blood pressure. While acknowledging the limited evidence for the long-term benefits of continuous positive airway pressure treatment, especially cardiovascular outcomes, as summarized by the AHRQ report, this commentary reviews the limitations of recent randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized controlled studies and the challenges of conducting future randomized controlled trials. A research agenda to address these challenges is proposed including study designs that may include both high quality randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized controlled studies. This commentary concludes by highlighting implications for the safety and quality of life for the millions of people living with obstructive sleep apnea if the AHRQ report alone was used by payers to limit coverage for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea while not considering the totality of available evidence.

CITATION

Patil SP, Billings ME, Bourjeily G, et al. Long-term health outcomes for patients with obstructive sleep apnea: placing the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality report in context-a multisociety commentary. J Clin Sleep Med. 2024;20(1):135-149.

Network and covariate adjusted response-adaptive design for binary response

Randomization is a distinguishing feature of clinical trials for unbiased assessment of treatment efficacy. With a growing demand for more flexible and efficient randomization schemes and motivated by the idea of adaptive design, in this article we propose the network and covariate adjusted response-adaptive (NCARA) design that can concurrently manage three challenges: (1) maximizing benefits of a trial by assigning more patients to the superior treatment group randomly; (2) balancing social network ties across treatment arms to eliminate potential network interference; and (3) ensuring balance of important covariates, such as age, gender, and other potential confounders. We conduct simulation with different network structures and a variety of parameter settings. It is observed that the NCARA design outperforms four alternative randomization designs in solving the above-mentioned problems and has comparable power and type I error for detecting true difference between treatment groups. In addition, we conduct real data analysis to implement the new design in two clinical trials. Compared to equal randomization (the original design utilized in the trials), the NCARA design slightly increases power, largely increases the percentage of patients assigned to the better-performing group, and significantly improves network and covariate balances. It is also noted that the advantages of the NCARA design are augmented when the sample size is small and the level of network interference is high. In summary, the proposed NCARA design assists researchers in conducting clinical trials with high-quality and high-efficiency.

Different dosages of vonoprazan for gastroesophageal reflux disease: study protocol for a pragmatic, crossover-cluster, randomized controlled trial with patient preference arms

BACKGROUND

Vonoprazan results in more potent acid suppression for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) than proton pump inhibitors. It has only been approved for treating erosive esophagitis in China, but 30-40% of GERD patients cannot achieve the goal of treatment with vonoprazan 20 mg daily. This study aims to investigate whether vonoprazan could relieve the symptoms of Chinese patients with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) and whether increased dosage or different times of dosing could increase the response rate of GERD.

METHODS

This study is a pragmatic, open-label, crossover-cluster, randomized controlled trial with patient preference arms. Two thousand eight hundred eighty patients with GERD from 48 hospitals in China will be enrolled. These hospitals will be divided into a compulsory randomization cluster (24 hospitals) and a patient preference cluster (24 hospitals). Patients in the compulsory randomization cluster will be randomized to three regimens according to the crossover-cluster randomization. Patients in the patient preference cluster may choose to receive any regimen if they have a preference; otherwise, patients will be randomly assigned. The three treatment regimens will last 4 weeks, including (1) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after breakfast, (2) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after dinner, and (3) vonoprazan 20 mg p.o. after breakfast and after dinner. Patients will attend a baseline visit, a 4-week e-diary, a fourth-week visit, and a sixth-month visit online. The primary outcome is the symptom relief rate of all patients after 4-week therapy. Secondary outcomes include the healing rate of EE patients, the severity of symptoms, compliance with the therapy at the fourth-week follow-up visit, recurrent symptoms, and the frequency of self-conscious doctor visits at the sixth-month follow-up visit.

DISCUSSION

This trial will explore the effectiveness of different regimens of vonoprazan that will be implemented with GERD patients in China. The randomization with patient preferences considered and the crossover-cluster component may improve the robustness and extrapolation of study conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.chictr.org.cn ChiCTR2300069857. Registered on 28 March 2023.

PROTOCOL VERSION

February 18, 2023, Version 2.

Is equipoise a useful concept to justify randomised controlled trials in the cultural context of Pakistan? A survey of clinicians in relation to a trial of talking therapy for young people who self-harm

BACKGROUND

Clinical equipoise, also defined as the uncertainty principle, is considered essential when recruiting subjects to a clinical trial. However, equipoise is threatened when clinicians are influenced by their own preferences. Little research has investigated equipoise in the context of trial recruitment.

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey sought clinicians' views (operationalised as 11 statements relating to treatments offered in a trial of a psychological intervention for young people) about equipoise and individual treatment preferences in the context of moral justification for recruiting young people at risk of self-harm or suicide to a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the Youth Culturally Adapted Manual Assisted Psychological Intervention (Y-CMAP) in Pakistan. We compared the views of clinicians involved in Y-CMAP RCT recruitment to those of a sample of clinicians not involved in trial recruitment but treating similar patients, comparing their sociodemographic characteristics and the proportions of those in each group agreeing with each statement.

RESULTS

There was a response rate of 96% (75/78). Findings showed that, during trial recruitment and before the RCT results were known, the majority of all responding clinicians (73.3%) considered Y-CMAP to be an effective treatment for young people at risk of self-harm or suicide. Although there was an acknowledgement of individual preferences for the intervention, there was near consensus (90%) on the need to conduct an RCT for reaching an evidence-based decision. However, there were no significant differences in the proportion of recruiting clinicians reporting a treatment preference for Y-CMAP than non-recruiting clinicians (31 (88.6%) versus 36 (90%), p = 0.566). A significantly higher proportion of non-recruiting clinicians (87.5%) as compared to (48.5%) in the trial (p = 0.000) stated that there may be other treatments that may be equally good for the patients, seemingly undermining a preference for the intervention. Those reporting a treatment preference also acknowledged that there was nothing on which this preference was based, however confident they felt about them, thus accepting clinical equipoise as ethical justification for conducting the RCT. There was a significant group difference in views that treatment overall is better as a result of young patients' participation in the Y-CMAP trial (p = 0.015) (i.e. more clinicians not involved in the trial agreed with this statement). Similarly, more clinicians not involved in the trial agreed on the perceived availability of other treatment options that were good for young people at risk of self-harm (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The paper highlights that clinicians in Pakistan accept the notion of clinical equipoise as an ethical justification for patient participation in RCTs. The need for conducting RCTs to generate evidence base and to reduce bias was considered important by the clinical community.

Best Practice Alerts Informed by Inpatient Opioid Intake to Reduce Opioid Prescribing after Surgery (PRIOR): A Cluster Randomized Multiple Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Overprescription of opioids after surgery remains common. Residual and unnecessarily prescribed opioids can provide a reservoir for nonmedical use. This study therefore tested the hypothesis that a decision-support tool embedded in electronic health records guides clinicians to prescribe fewer opioids at discharge after inpatient surgery.

METHODS

This study included 21,689 surgical inpatient discharges in a cluster randomized multiple crossover trial from July 2020 to June 2021 in four Colorado hospitals. Hospital-level clusters were randomized to alternating 8-week periods during which an electronic decision-support tool recommended tailored discharge opioid prescriptions based on previous inpatient opioid intake. During active alert periods, the alert was displayed to clinicians when the proposed opioid prescription exceeded recommended amounts. No alerts were displayed during inactive periods. Carryover effects were mitigated by including 4-week washout periods. The primary outcome was oral morphine milligram equivalents prescribed at discharge. Secondary outcomes included combination opioid and nonopioid prescriptions and additional opioid prescriptions until day 28 after discharge. A vigorous state-wide opioid education and awareness campaign was in place during the trial.

RESULTS

The total postdischarge opioid prescription was a median [quartile 1, quartile 3] of 75 [0, 225] oral morphine milligram equivalents among 11,003 patients discharged when the alerts were active and 100 [0, 225] morphine milligram equivalents in 10,686 patients when the alerts were inactive, with an estimated ratio of geometric means of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.80 to 1.13; P = 0.586). The alert was displayed in 28% (3,074 of 11,003) of the discharges during the active alert period. There was no relationship between the alert and prescribed opioid and nonopioid combination medications or additional opioid prescriptions written after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

A decision-support tool incorporated into electronic medical records did not reduce discharge opioid prescribing for postoperative patients in the context of vigorous opioid education and awareness efforts. Opioid prescribing alerts might yet be valuable in other contexts.(Anesthesiology 2023; 139:186-96).

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Strategies to Assess the Effect of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure on Long-Term Clinically Important Outcomes among Patients with Symptomatic Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the first-line treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Although CPAP improves symptoms (e.g., daytime sleepiness), there is a lack of high-quality evidence that CPAP prevents many long-term outcomes, including cognitive impairment, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Observational studies suggest that patients with symptoms may be particularly likely to experience these preventive benefits with CPAP, but ethical and practical concerns limited the participation of such patients in prior long-term randomized trials. As a result, there is uncertainty about the full benefits of CPAP, and resolving this uncertainty is a key priority for the field. This workshop assembled clinicians, researchers, ethicists, and patients to identify strategies to understand the causal effects of CPAP on long-term clinically important outcomes among patients with symptomatic OSA. Quasi-experimental designs can provide valuable information and are less time and resource intensive than trials. Under specific conditions and assumptions, quasi-experimental studies may be able to provide causal estimates of CPAP's effectiveness from generalizable observational cohorts. However, randomized trials represent the most reliable approach to understanding the causal effects of CPAP among patients with symptoms. Randomized trials of CPAP can ethically include patients with symptomatic OSA, as long as there is outcome-specific equipoise, adequate informed consent, and a plan to maximize safety while minimizing harm (e.g., monitoring for pathologic sleepiness). Furthermore, multiple strategies exist to ensure the generalizability and practicality of future randomized trials of CPAP. These strategies include reducing the burden of trial procedures, improving patient-centeredness, and engaging historically excluded and underserved populations.

Pragmatic Comparative Effectiveness Trials and Learning Health Systems in Pain Medicine: Opportunities and Challenges

Large randomized clinical trials or aggregates of clinical trials represent the highest levels of clinical evidence because they minimize different sources of confounding and bias. The current review provides an in-depth discussion of the challenges faced and methods we can use to overcome these obstacles to tailor novel designs of pragmatic effectiveness trials to pain medicine. The authors describe their experiences with an open-source learning health system to collect high-quality evidence and conduct pragmatic clinical trials within a busy academic pain center.

There is (probably) no (meaningful) difference in (most) outcomes between 'spinal' and 'general' anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery: time to move forward

A meta-analysis influenced by two recent large randomised controlled trials (REGAIN and RAGA) concluded that little, if any, difference in commonly measured outcomes exists between patients administered spinal or general anaesthesia for their hip fracture surgery. We explore whether there is genuinely no difference, or what the methodological problems in research might be that prevent any real difference from being observed. We also discuss the need for greater nuance in future research to determine how anaesthetists might deliver perioperative care towards improving postoperative recovery trajectories in patients following hip fracture.

Artificial Intelligence for Perioperative Medicine: Perioperative Intelligence

The anesthesiologist's role has expanded beyond the operating room, and anesthesiologist-led care teams can deliver coordinated care that spans the entire surgical experience, from preoperative optimization to long-term recovery of surgical patients. This expanded role can help reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality, which are regrettably common, unlike rare intraoperative mortality. Postoperative mortality, if considered a disease category, will be the third leading cause of death just after heart disease and cancer. Rapid advances in technologies like artificial intelligence provide an opportunity to build safe perioperative practices. Artificial intelligence helps by analyzing complex data across disparate systems and producing actionable information. Using artificial intelligence technologies, we can critically examine every aspect of perioperative medicine and devise innovative value-based solutions that can potentially improve patient safety and care delivery, while optimizing cost of care. In this narrative review, we discuss specific applications of artificial intelligence that may help advance all aspects of perioperative medicine, including clinical care, education, quality improvement, and research. We also discuss potential limitations of technology and provide our recommendations for successful adoption.

Integrated rapid-cycle comparative effectiveness trials using flexible point of care randomisation in electronic health record systems

Whilst the Randomised Controlled Trial remains the gold standard for deriving robust causal estimates of treatment efficacy, too often a traditional design proves prohibitively expensive or cumbersome when it comes to assessing questions regarding the comparative effectiveness of routinely used treatments. As a result, patients experience variation in practice as clinicians lack the evidence needed to personalise treatments effectively. This variation may be classified as unwarranted, where existing evidence is ignored, or legitimate where in the absence of evidence, clinicians rely on experience, expert opinion, and inferred principles from basic science to make decisions. We argue that within the right ethical and technological framework, legitimate variation can be transformed into a mechanism for evidence generation and learning. Learning Health Systems which harness existing variation in practice, represent a novel approach for generating evidence from everyday clinical practice. The development of these systems has gained traction due to the increased availability of modern Electronic Health Record Systems. However, despite their promise, overcoming hurdles to successfully integrating clinical trials within Learning Health Systems has proven challenging. This article describes the origins of integrated clinical trials and explores two main barriers to their further implementation - how best to obtain informed consent from patients to participate in routine comparative effectiveness research, and how to automate and integrate randomisation into a clinical workflow. Having described these barriers, we present a potential solution in the form of a research pipeline using a novel form of flexible point-of-care randomisation to allow clinicians and patients to participate in studies where there is clinical equipoise.

Recruitment characteristics of randomised trials in critical care: A systematic review

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To summarise the temporal trends of recruitment and methodological characteristics of critical care randomised controlled trials with the primary outcome of mortality.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for articles meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria. Randomised controlled trials, with primary outcome of mortality, of adult and paediatric critical care patients treated in an intensive care unit, were included. Neonatal intensive care unit trials, non-English publications and conference proceedings or abstracts without full-length publications were excluded. Duplicate literature search, article selection and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers with disputes resolved through discussion. Data were extracted into a custom-designed Research Electronic Data Capture database.

RESULTS

The search identified 67,199 records of which 230 were included. The annual number of critical care randomised controlled trials published increased gradually over a 30-year period from 0 in 1990 to 19 in 2014 with stabilisation at 8-11 between 2015 and 2020. Twenty-seven percent of randomised controlled trials were low risk in all categories using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Methodological characteristics such as registration on clinical trials registries and data safety monitoring committee presence significantly (p < 0.001) increased over time. The median recruitment was 376 patients (interquartile range 125-895) with significant increase (p = 0.002) from 62 (interquartile range: 33-486) in 1991 to 725 (interquartile range: 537-2600) in 2020. This was accompanied by an increase in recruitment times. Thus overall, recruitment rates did not increase. Early cessation occurred in 23% (54/230) of randomised controlled trials with no temporal trend.

CONCLUSION

The number, size and some methodological qualities of critical randomised controlled trials with primary outcome of mortality have increased over time, but rates of recruitment and early cessation have been unchanged.

Platform trials for anaesthesia and perioperative medicine: a narrative review

Large randomised trials provide the most reliable evidence of effectiveness of new treatments in clinical practice. However, the time and resources required to complete such trials can be daunting. An overarching clinical trial platform focused on a single condition or type of surgery, aiming to compare several treatments, with an option to stop any or add in new treatment options, can provide greater efficiency. This has the potential to accelerate knowledge acquisition and identify effective, ineffective, or harmful treatments faster. The master protocol of the platform defines the study population(s) and standardised procedures. Ineffective or harmful treatments can be discarded or study drug dose modified during the life cycle of the trial. Other adaptive elements that can be modified include eligibility criteria, required sample size for any comparison(s), randomisation assignment ratio, and the addition of other promising treatment options. There are excellent opportunities for anaesthetists to establish platform trials in perioperative medicine. Platform trials are highly efficient, with the potential to provide quicker answers to important clinical questions that lead to improved patient care.

Protocol for SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home): feasibility of a home-based double-blind randomised controlled trial to improve gait and cognition in individuals at risk for dementia

INTRODUCTION

Physical exercise and cognitive training have the potential to enhance cognitive function and mobility in older adults at risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD), but little is known about the feasibility of delivering multidomain interventions in home settings of older adults at risk of ADRD. This study aims to assess the feasibility of home-based delivery of exercise and cognitive interventions, and to evaluate the relationship between participants' intervention preferences and their subsequent adherence. Secondary objectives include the effect of the interventions on ADRD risk factors, including frailty, mobility, sleep, diet and psychological health.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The SYNchronising Exercises, Remedies in GaIt and Cognition at Home (SYNERGIC@Home) feasibility trial is a randomised control trial that follows a 2×2 factorial design, with a 16-week home-based intervention programme (3 sessions per week) of physical exercises and cognitive training. Participants will be randomised in blocks of four to one of the following four arms: (1) combined exercise (aerobic and resistance)+cognitive training (NEUROPEAK); (2) combined exercise+control cognitive training (web searching); (3) control exercise (balance and toning)+cognitive training; and (4) control exercise+control cognitive training. SYNERGIC@Home will be implemented through video conferencing. Baseline and post-intervention assessments at 4-month and 10-month follow-up will include measures of cognition, frailty, mobility, sleep, diet and psychological health. Primary feasibility outcome is adherence to the interventions. Primary analytic outcome is the relationship between pre-allocation preference for a given intervention and subsequent adherence to the allocated intervention. A series of secondary analytic outcomes examining the potential effect of the individual and combined interventions on cognitive, mobility and general well-being will be measured at baseline and follow-up.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was granted by the relevant research ethics boards. Findings of the study will be presented to stakeholders and published in peer-reviewed journals and at provincial, national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04997681, Pre-results.

(Im)precise trial descriptions

Terms such as prospective, interventional, and controlled are redundant in the context of randomised trials, and are therefore distracting. Pragmatic should probably be reserved for trials that intentionally control little except the exposure. The term pilot should be reserved for trials that were designated to a priori and registered as pilot trials, and have appropriate pilot outcomes. 'Pragmatic' and 'real-world' should not be inserted to excuse poor trial design; and similarly, 'pilot' should not be appended to excuse inadequate power.

How cutting-edge trial design can assess outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have come to be accepted as the gold standard for assessing the efficacy and effectiveness of therapeutics and interventions in medicine. In this paper, we aim to describe some evolving concepts associated with the design and conduct of RCTs and outline new approaches aiming to increase efficiency and reduce costs.

RECENT FINDINGS

A well-powered and performed RCT is usually a study involving several different centers from different geographical areas that enrolls a large number of patients in diverse clinical settings. Altogether, these features increase the generalizability of the study and make the rapid implementation of the findings more likely. However, this does not come without cost. Among several possible alternatives to conventional RCTs, the most important ones are related to the unit of randomization (individual vs. cluster), study design (conventional vs. adaptive), randomization scheme (fixed vs. response-adaptive), data collection (conventional case report forms vs. registry-embedded) and statistical approach (frequentist vs. Bayesian).

SUMMARY

While conventional RCTs remain the gold standard for generating evidence, new trial designs may be considered to reduce sample size and costs while improving trial efficiency and power. However, they raise new challenges for testing feasibility, conduct, ethical oversight and statistical analysis.

Prospective, Multicenter, Controlled Trial of Mobile Stroke Units

BACKGROUND

Mobile stroke units (MSUs) are ambulances with staff and a computed tomographic scanner that may enable faster treatment with tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) than standard management by emergency medical services (EMS). Whether and how much MSUs alter outcomes has not been extensively studied.

METHODS

In an observational, prospective, multicenter, alternating-week trial, we assessed outcomes from MSU or EMS management within 4.5 hours after onset of acute stroke symptoms. The primary outcome was the score on the utility-weighted modified Rankin scale (range, 0 to 1, with higher scores indicating better outcomes according to a patient value system, derived from scores on the modified Rankin scale of 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating more disability). The main analysis involved dichotomized scores on the utility-weighted modified Rankin scale (≥0.91 or <0.91, approximating scores on the modified Rankin scale of ≤1 or >1) at 90 days in patients eligible for t-PA. Analyses were also performed in all enrolled patients.

RESULTS

We enrolled 1515 patients, of whom 1047 were eligible to receive t-PA; 617 received care by MSU and 430 by EMS. The median time from onset of stroke to administration of t-PA was 72 minutes in the MSU group and 108 minutes in the EMS group. Of patients eligible for t-PA, 97.1% in the MSU group received t-PA, as compared with 79.5% in the EMS group. The mean score on the utility-weighted modified Rankin scale at 90 days in patients eligible for t-PA was 0.72 in the MSU group and 0.66 in the EMS group (adjusted odds ratio for a score of ≥0.91, 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75 to 3.36; P<0.001). Among the patients eligible for t-PA, 55.0% in the MSU group and 44.4% in the EMS group had a score of 0 or 1 on the modified Rankin scale at 90 days. Among all enrolled patients, the mean score on the utility-weighted modified Rankin scale at discharge was 0.57 in the MSU group and 0.51 in the EMS group (adjusted odds ratio for a score of ≥0.91, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.39 to 2.37; P<0.001). Secondary clinical outcomes generally favored MSUs. Mortality at 90 days was 8.9% in the MSU group and 11.9% in the EMS group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute stroke who were eligible for t-PA, utility-weighted disability outcomes at 90 days were better with MSUs than with EMS. (Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; BEST-MSU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02190500.).

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: Disease mechanisms and drug development

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a chronic progressive disease of unknown cause characterized by relentless scarring of the lung parenchyma leading to reduced quality of life and earlier mortality. IPF is an age-related disorder, and with the population aging worldwide, the economic burden of IPF is expected to steadily increase in the future. The mechanisms of fibrosis in IPF remain elusive, with favored concepts of disease pathogenesis involving recurrent microinjuries to a genetically predisposed alveolar epithelium, followed by an aberrant reparative response characterized by excessive collagen deposition. Pirfenidone and nintedanib are approved for treatment of IPF based on their ability to slow functional decline and disease progression; however, they do not offer a cure and are associated with tolerability issues. In this review, we critically discuss how cutting-edge research in disease pathogenesis may translate into identification of new therapeutic targets, thus facilitate drug discovery. There is a growing portfolio of treatment options for IPF. However, targeting the multitude of profibrotic cytokines and growth factors involved in disease pathogenesis may require a combination of therapeutic strategies with different mechanisms of action.

The changing perspective of clinical trial designs

Maintaining health and well-being of the population is a universal priority. Governments around the globe are therefore seeking greater efficiency and better outcomes from researches being held. Although large randomized trials or systematic review of several large trials provides the highest level of evidence, the intricate cost, time, and difficulties of conventional trials have led to questions about their sustainability commanding search for alternative approaches. Demands for improved competences in medical research have led to mounting interest in newer clinical trial designs. This article provides an insight into newer clinical trial designs, including cluster trials, adaptive designs, the master protocols along with their strengths, weaknesses, and which trials design should be opted for in different clinical scenarios.

Pediatric Neurology Research in the Twenty-First Century: Status, Challenges, and Future Directions Post-COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The year 2020 marked a fundamental shift in the pediatric neurology field. An impressive positive trajectory of advances in patient care and research faced sudden global disruptions by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and by an international movement protesting racial, socioeconomic, and health disparities. The disruptions revealed obstacles and fragility within the pediatric neurology research mission. However, renewed commitment offers unique opportunities for the pediatric neurology research community to enhance and prioritize research directions for the coming decades.

METHODS

The Research Committee of the Child Neurology Society evaluated the challenges and opportunities facing the pediatric neurology research field, including reviewing published literature, synthesizing publically available data, and conducting a survey of pediatric neurologists.

RESULTS

We identified three priority domains for the research mission: funding levels, active guidance, and reducing disparities. Funding levels: to increase funding to match the burden of pediatric neurological disease; to tailor funding mechanisms and strategies to support clinical trial efforts unique to pediatric neurology; and to support investigators across their career trajectory. Active guidance: to optimize infrastructure and strategies, to leverage novel therapeutics, enhance data collection, and improve inclusion of children in clinical trials. Reducing disparities: to reduce health disparities in children with neurological disease, to develop proactive measures to enhance workforce diversity and inclusion, and increase avenues to balance work-life obligations for investigators.

CONCLUSIONS

In this uniquely challenging epoch, the pediatric neurology research community has a timely and important mission to re-engage the public and government, advancing the health of children with neurological conditions.

Survival after primary breast cancer surgery following propofol or sevoflurane general anesthesia-A retrospective, multicenter, database analysis of 6305 Swedish patients

BACKGROUND

Retrospective studies indicate that the choice of anesthetic can affect long-term cancer survival. Propofol seems to have an advantage over sevoflurane. However, this is questioned for breast cancer. We gathered a large cohort of breast cancer surgery patients from seven Swedish hospitals and hypothesized that general anesthesia with propofol would be superior to sevoflurane anesthesia regarding long-term breast cancer survival.

METHODS

We identified all patients who were anaesthetized for breast cancer surgery between 2006 and 2012. The patients were matched to the Swedish Breast Cancer Quality Register, to retrieve tumor characteristics, prognostic factors, and adjuvant treatment as well as date of death. Overall survival between patients undergoing sevoflurane and propofol anesthesia was analyzed with different statistical approaches: (a) multiple Cox regression models adjusted for demographic, oncological, and multiple control variables, (b) propensity score matching on the same variables, but also including the participating centers as a cofactor in a separate analysis.

RESULTS

The database analysis identified 6305 patients. The 5-year survival rates were 91.0% and 81.8% for the propofol and sevoflurane group, respectively, in the final model (P = .126). Depending on the statistical adjustment method used, different results were obtained, from a non-significant to a "proposed" and even a "determined" difference in survival that favored propofol, with a maximum of 9.2 percentage points higher survival rate at 5 years (hazard ratio 1.46, 95% CI 1.10-1.95).

CONCLUSIONS

It seems that propofol may have a survival advantage compared with sevoflurane among breast cancer patients, but the inherent weaknesses of retrospective analyses were made apparent.