Impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects in randomised clinical trials: meta-epidemiological study

Democratising the design and delivery of large-scale randomised, controlled clinical trials in primary care: A personal view

BACKGROUND

Rapid identification of effective treatments for use in the community during a pandemic is vital for the well-being of individuals and the sustainability of healthcare systems and society. Furthermore, identifying treatments that do not work reduces research wastage, spares people unnecessary side effects, rationalises the cost of purchasing and stockpiling medication, and reduces inappropriate medication use. Nevertheless, only a small minority of therapeutic trials for SARS-CoV-2 infections have been in primary care: most opened too late, struggled to recruit, and few produced actionable results. Participation in research is often limited by where one lives or receives health care, and trial participants may not represent those for whom the treatments are intended.

INNOVATIVE TRIALS

The ALIC4E, PRINCIPLE and the ongoing PANORAMIC trial have randomised over 40,500 people with COVID-19. This personal view describes how these trials have innovated in: trial design (by using novel adaptive platform designs); trial delivery (by complementing traditional site-based recruitment ('the patient comes to the research') with mechanisms to enable sick, infectious people to participate without having to leave home ('taking research to the people'), and by addressing the 'inverse research participation law,' which highlights disproportionate barriers faced by those who have the most to contribute, and benefit from, research, and; in transforming the evidence base by evaluating nine medicines to support guidelines and care decisions world-wide for COVID-19 and contribute to antimicrobial stewardship.

CONCLUSION

The PRINCIPLE and PANORAMIC trials represent models of innovation and inclusivity, and exemplify the potential of primary care to lead the way in addressing pressing global health challenges.

Effect of nitrate supplementation on oxygen saturation levels for acute mountain sickness prevention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to systematically review the effect of nitrate supplementation on blood oxygen saturation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases from their inception up to October 2022. Two reviewers independently conducted two stages of the screening process to include a randomized controlled trial with nitrate supplementation versus placebo intervention assessing oxygen saturation among lowlanders going to either real or simulated high altitude environments. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Fixed-effect model meta-analyses were conducted for laboratory-based studies. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted for real-world studies.

RESULTS

We found 7 trials that met the eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis of studies with some bias concerns showed an increase of 1.26 % in the SpO2 with 44 % I2 during submaximal exercise at simulated high altitudes (GRADE: low). On the contrary, a meta-analysis of studies without heterogeneity showed that nitrate supplementation aggravated oxygen saturation decline (-2.64 %, p = 0.03, GRADE: high) during rest in real high-altitude environments. A meta-analysis also showed that nitrate supplementation did not affect Acute Mountain Sickness (AMS) symptoms (GRADE: high).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that nitrate supplementation did not provide benefits for AMS prevention during rest at high altitudes. The low-quality evidence showing small beneficial effects of nitrate supplementation during exercise calls for further studies.

Effects of a brief intervention based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy versus usual care for cardiac rehabilitation patients with coronary heart disease (ACTonHEART): a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of the study is to investigate the short-term efficacy of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) on the simultaneous modification of biological indicators of risk and psychological well-being in patients with coronary heart disease attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR).

DESIGN

This was a two-arm randomised controlled trial comparing a brief, manualised, ACT-based intervention with usual care (UC).

SETTING

The study was conducted in an outpatient CR unit in Italy. Data collection took place from January 2016 to July 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-two patients were enrolled and randomised, following an unbalanced randomisation ratio of 2:1 to the ACT group (n=59) and the control group (n=33). Eighty-five patients completed the ACT (n=54) and the UC (n=31) interventions and were analysed.

INTERVENTIONS

The control group received UC, a 6 weeks multidisciplinary outpatient CR programme, encompassing exercise training, educational counselling and medical examinations. The experimental group, in addition to UC, participated in the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy on HEART disease (ACTonHEART) intervention encompassing three group sessions based on ACT.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcomes were Low Density Lipoproteins (LDL)cholesterol, resting systolic blood pressure, body mass index (BMI) and psychological well-being measured by the Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWBI). Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and at the end of CR.

RESULTS

Based on linear mixed models, no significant group × time interaction was observed for either the primary outcomes (β, 95% CI: PGWBI =-1.13, -6.40 to -4.14; LDL cholesterol =-2.13, -11.02 to -6.76; systolic blood pressure =-0.50, -10.76 to -9.76; diastolic blood pressure =-2.73, -10.12 to -4.65; BMI =-0.16, -1.83 to -1.51, all p values >0.05) or the secondary outcomes (all p values >0.05). A significant time effect was found for the PGWBI total (beta=4.72; p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Although analyses revealed null findings, the results can inform the design of future ACT-based CR interventions and can help researchers to strike a balance between the idealised implementation of an ACT intervention and the structural limitations of existing CR programmes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01909102.

Blinding Assessments in Neonatal Ventilation Meta-Analyses: A Systematic Meta-Epidemiological Review

INTRODUCTION

Randomization and blinding are generally important in randomized trials. In neonatology, blinding of ventilation strategies is unfeasible if not impossible and we hypothesized that its importance has been overestimated, while the peculiarities of the neonatal patient and the specific outcomes have not been considered.

METHODS

For this meta-epidemiological review, we searched PubMed and Scopus databases in November 2023. We included all meta-analyses focusing on ventilation, published in past 5 years, and reporting either mortality or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) as an outcome. We extracted the information about how the authors had analyzed risk of bias and evidence certainty.

RESULTS

We screened 494 abstracts and included 40 meta-analyses. Overall, 13 of the 40 reviews assessed blinding properly. Australian and European authors were most likely to perform correct assessment of the blinding (p = 0.03) and the use of RoB 2.0 tool was also associated with proper assessment (p < 0.001). In multivariate regression, the use of RoB 2.0 was the only factor associated with a proper assessment (Beta 0.57 [95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.99]). GRADE ratings were performed in 25 reviews, and the authors downgraded the evidence certainty due to risk of bias in 19 of these and none of these reviews performed the blinding assessment correctly.

CONCLUSION

In past neonatal evidence syntheses, the role of blinding has been mostly overestimated, which has led to downgrading of evidence certainty. Objective outcomes (such as mortality and BPD) do not need to be downgraded due to lack of blinding, as the knowledge of the received intervention does not influence the outcome assessment.

Empirical meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for adult patients with sepsis (EMPRESS) trial: Protocol

BACKGROUND

Piperacillin/tazobactam may be associated with less favourable outcomes than carbapenems in patients with severe bacterial infections, but the certainty of evidence is low.

METHODS

The Empirical Meropenem versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Adult Patients with Sepsis (EMPRESS) trial is an investigator-initiated, international, parallel-group, randomised, open-label, adaptive clinical trial with an integrated feasibility phase. We will randomise adult, critically ill patients with sepsis to empirical treatment with meropenem or piperacillin/tazobactam for up to 30 days. The primary outcome is 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes are serious adverse reactions within 30 days; isolation precautions due to resistant bacteria within 30 days; days alive without life support and days alive and out of hospital within 30 and 90 days; 90- and 180-day all-cause mortality and 180-day health-related quality of life. EMPRESS will use Bayesian statistical models with weak to somewhat sceptical neutral priors. Adaptive analyses will be conducted after follow-up of the primary outcome for the first 400 participants concludes and after every 300 subsequent participants, with adaptive stopping for superiority/inferiority and practical equivalence (absolute risk difference <2.5%-points) and response-adaptive randomisation. The expected sample sizes in scenarios with no, small or large differences are 5189, 5859 and 2570 participants, with maximum 14,000 participants and ≥99% probability of conclusiveness across all scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

EMPRESS will compare the effects of empirical meropenem against piperacillin/tazobactam in adult, critically ill patients with sepsis. Due to the pragmatic, adaptive design with high probability of conclusiveness, the trial results are expected to directly inform clinical practice.

Acellular fish skin grafts in the treatment of diabetic wounds: Advantages and clinical translation

Diabetic wounds cannot undergo normal wound healing due to changes in the concentration of hyperglycemia in the body and soon evolve into chronic wounds causing amputation or even death of patients. Diabetic wounds directly affect the quality of patients and social medical management; thus researchers started to focus on skin transplantation technology. The acellular fish skin grafts (AFSGs) are derived from wild fish, which avoids the influence of human immune function and the spread of the virus through low-cost decellularization. AFSGs contain a large amount of collagen and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and they have an amazing effect on wound regeneration. However, after our search in major databases, we found that there were few research trials in this field, and only one was clinically approved. Therefore, we summarized the advantages of AFSGs and listed the problems faced in clinical use. The purpose of this paper is to enable researchers to better carry out original experiments at various stages.

Ivermectin for COVID-19 in adults in the community (PRINCIPLE): An open, randomised, controlled, adaptive platform trial of short- and longer-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The evidence for whether ivermectin impacts recovery, hospital admissions, and longer-term outcomes in COVID-19 is contested. The WHO recommends its use only in the context of clinical trials.

METHODS

In this multicentre, open-label, multi-arm, adaptive platform randomised controlled trial, we included participants aged ≥18 years in the community, with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test, and symptoms lasting ≤14 days. Participants were randomised to usual care, usual care plus ivermectin tablets (target 300-400 μg/kg per dose, once daily for 3 days), or usual care plus other interventions. Co-primary endpoints were time to first self-reported recovery, and COVID-19 related hospitalisation/death within 28 days, analysed using Bayesian models. Recovery at 6 months was the primary, longer term outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN86534580.

FINDINGS

The primary analysis included 8811 SARS-CoV-2 positive participants (median symptom duration 5 days), randomised to ivermectin (n = 2157), usual care (n = 3256), and other treatments (n = 3398) from June 23, 2021 to July 1, 2022. Time to self-reported recovery was shorter in the ivermectin group compared with usual care (hazard ratio 1·15 [95% Bayesian credible interval, 1·07 to 1·23], median decrease 2.06 days [1·00 to 3·06]), probability of meaningful effect (pre-specified hazard ratio ≥1.2) 0·192). COVID-19-related hospitalisations/deaths (odds ratio 1·02 [0·63 to 1·62]; estimated percentage difference 0% [-1% to 0·6%]), serious adverse events (three and five respectively), and the proportion feeling fully recovered were similar in both groups at 6 months (74·3% and 71·2% respectively (RR = 1·05, [1·02 to 1·08]) and also at 3 and 12 months.

INTERPRETATION

Ivermectin for COVID-19 is unlikely to provide clinically meaningful improvement in recovery, hospital admissions, or longer-term outcomes. Further trials of ivermectin for SARS-Cov-2 infection in vaccinated community populations appear unwarranted.

FUNDING

UKRI/National Institute of Health Research (MC_PC_19079).

Placebo analgesia in physical and psychological interventions: Systematic review and meta-analysis of three-armed trials

BACKGROUND

The magnitude of placebo effects from physical and psychological 'sham' is unknown but could impact efficacy trials and treatment understanding. To quantify placebo effects, this systematic review of three-armed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physical and psychological interventions for pain compared outcomes in 'sham' control intervention and non-exposure arms.

METHODS

RCTs with treatment, 'sham' control intervention, and non-exposure groups were included, enrolling adults with any pain. A protocol was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42023413324), and twelve databases searched from 2008 to July 2023. Trial methods and blinding were analysed descriptively and risk of bias assessed. Meta-analysis of pain measures at short-, medium- and long-term was performed with random-effects models of standardised mean differences (SMD).Studies were sub-grouped according to control intervention type.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs were included. The average short-term placebo effect was small (0.21 SMD, 0.1-0.33 95% CI, p = 0.0002, 1440 participants). It showed no heterogeneity (Tau2  = 0.1, I2  = 11%, p = 0.3), preventing meta-regression analyses of effect modifiers. However, sub-group analyses revealed larger placebo effects in manual control interventions compared to disabled devices and miscellaneous control interventions. Overall, placebo analgesia accounted for 39% of treatments' short-term effectiveness. No placebo effects were found at medium-term (7 RCTs, 381 participants) or long-term follow-up (3 RCTs, 173 participants).

CONCLUSIONS

The observed placebo analgesia has mechanistic and methodological implications, though its clinical importance may be limited. Control intervention design affects placebo effects, highlighting the importance of considering methodology in RCT interpretation. Review limitations include a small number of long-term studies and sample heterogeneity.

SIGNIFICANCE

This systematic review directly quantifies placebo effects from physical and psychological 'sham' control interventions and compares them to treatments' overall effectiveness. By doing so, the review enhances our understanding of placebo effects, their relative contribution in clinical trials, and their susceptibly to trial design. It poses further questions regarding the influence of blinding, participant expectations, and features of the therapeutic context. Overall, the insights provided by this review carry methodological significance and are important for the interpretation and synthesis of efficacy trials in this field.

Influence of lack of blinding on the estimation of medication-related harms: a retrospective cohort study of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Empirical evidence suggests that lack of blinding may be associated with biased estimates of treatment benefit in randomized controlled trials, but the influence on medication-related harms is not well-recognized. We aimed to investigate the association between blinding and clinical trial estimates of medication-related harms.

METHODS

We searched PubMed from January 1, 2015, till January 1, 2020, for systematic reviews with meta-analyses of medication-related harms. Eligible meta-analyses must have contained trials both with and without blinding. Potential covariates that may confound effect estimates were addressed by restricting trials within the comparison or by hierarchical analysis of harmonized groups of meta-analyses (therefore harmonizing drug type, control, dosage, and registration status) across eligible meta-analyses. The weighted hierarchical linear regression was then used to estimate the differences in harm estimates (odds ratio, OR) between trials that lacked blinding and those that were blinded. The results were reported as the ratio of OR (ROR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

We identified 629 meta-analyses of harms with 10,069 trials. We estimated a weighted average ROR of 0.68 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.88, P < 0.01) among 82 trials in 20 meta-analyses where blinding of participants was lacking. With regard to lack of blinding of healthcare providers or outcomes assessors, the RORs were 0.68 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.87, P < 0.01 from 81 trials in 22 meta-analyses) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.94 to 1.07, P = 0.94 from 858 trials among 155 meta-analyses) respectively. Sensitivity analyses indicate that these findings are applicable to both objective and subjective outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of blinding of participants and health care providers in randomized controlled trials may underestimate medication-related harms. Adequate blinding in randomized trials, when feasible, may help safeguard against potential bias in estimating the effects of harms.

The impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects in randomized clinical trials on acupuncture: A meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the sole impact of blinding patients and outcome assessors in acupuncture randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on treatment effects while considering the type of outcome measures.

METHODS

We searched databases for the meta-analyses on acupuncture with both blinded and non-blinded RCTs. Mixed-effects meta-regression models estimated the average ratio of odds ratios (ROR) and differences in standardized mean differences (dSMD) for non-blinded RCTs versus blinded mixed-effects meta-regression model.

RESULTS

The study included 96 meta-analyses (1012 trials). The average ROR for lack of patient blinding was 1.08 (95% confidence intervals 0.79-1.49) in 18 meta-analyses with binary patient-reported outcomes. The average ROR for lack of outcome assessor blinding was 0.98 (0.77-1.24) in 43 meta-analyses with binary subjective outcomes. The average dSMD was -0.38 (-0.96 to 0.20) in 10 meta-analyses with continuous patient-reported outcomes. The average dSMD was -0.13 (-0.45 to 0.18) in 25 meta-analyses with continuous subjective outcomes. The results of the subgroup analysis were consistent with the primary analysis findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Blinding of participants and outcome assessors does not significantly influence acupuncture treatment efficacy. It underscores the practical difficulties of blinding in acupuncture RCTs and the necessity to distinguish between trials with and without successful blinding to understand treatment expectations' effects. Enhancing blinding procedures' quality and assessment in future research is crucial for improving RCTs' internal validity and reliability.

Self-help interventions for persistent physical symptoms: a systematic review of behaviour change components and their potential effects

Persistent physical symptoms (PPS) remain a challenge in the healthcare system due to time-constrained consultations, uncertainty and limited specialised care capacity. Self-help interventions may be a cost-effective way to widen the access to treatment. As a foundation for future interventions, we aimed to describe intervention components and their potential effects in self-help interventions for PPS. A systematic literature search was made in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. Fifty-one randomised controlled trials were included. Interventions were coded for effect on outcomes (standardised mean difference ≥0.2) related to symptom burden, anxiety, depression, quality of life, healthcare utilisation and sickness absence. The Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy v1 was used to code intervention components. An index of potential was calculated for each BCT within an outcome category. Each BCT was assessed as 'potentially effective' or 'not effective' based on a two-sided test for binomial random variables. Sixteen BCTs showed potential effect as treatment components. These BCTs represented the themes: goals and planning, feedback and monitoring, shaping knowledge, natural consequences, comparison of behaviour, associations, repetition and substitution, regulation, antecedents and identity. The results suggest that specific BCTs should be included in new PPS self-help interventions aiming to improve the patients' physical and mental health.

Are the results of open randomised controlled trials comparing antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia biased? Exploratory meta- and subgroup analysis

A recent meta-epidemiological study did not reveal major differences between the results of blinded and open randomised-controlled trials (RCTs). Fewer patients may consent to double-blind RCTs than to open RCTs, compromising generalisability, making this question very important. However, the issue has not been addressed in schizophrenia. We used a database of randomised, acute-phase antipsychotic drug trials. Whenever at least one open and one blinded RCT was available for a comparison of two drugs, we contrasted the results by random-effects meta-analysis with subgroup tests. The primary outcome was overall symptoms as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, supplemented by seven secondary efficacy and side-effect outcomes. We also examined whether open RCTs were biased in favour of more recently introduced antipsychotics, less efficacious or more prone to side-effects antipsychotics, and pharmaceutical sponsors. 183 RCTs (155 blinded and 28 open) with 34715 participants comparing two active drugs were available. The results did not suggest general differences between open and blinded RCTs, which examined two active drugs. Only 12 out of 122 subgroup tests had a p-value below 0.1, four below 0.05, and if a Bonferroni correction for multiple tests had been applied, only one would have been significant. There were some exceptions which, however, did not always confirm the originally hypothesized direction of bias. Due to the relatively small number of open RCTs, our analysis is exploratory, but this fundamental question should be given more scientific attention. Currently, open RCTs should be excluded from meta-analyses, at least in sensitivity analyses.

The influence of bias in randomized controlled trials on rehabilitation intervention effect estimates: what we have learned from meta-epidemiological studies

This study aimed to synthesize evidence from studies that addressed the influence of bias domains in randomized controlled trials on rehabilitation intervention effect estimates and discuss how these findings can maximize the trustworthiness of an RCT in rehabilitation. We screened studies about the influence of bias on rehabilitation intervention effect estimates published until June 2023. The characteristics and results of the included studies were categorized based on methodological characteristics and summarized narratively. We included seven studies with data on 227,806 RCT participants. Our findings showed that rehabilitation intervention effect estimates are likely exaggerated in trials with inadequate/unclear sequence generation and allocation concealment when using continuous outcomes. The influence of blinding was inconsistent and different from the rest of medical science, as meta-epidemiological studies showed overestimation, underestimation, or neutral associations for different types of blinding on rehabilitation treatment effect estimates. Still, it showed a more consistent pattern when looking at patient-reported outcomes. The impact of attrition bias and intention to treat has been analyzed only in two studies with inconsistent results. The risk of reporting bias seems to be associated with overestimation of treatment effects. Bias domains can influence rehabilitation treatment effects in different directions. The evidence is mixed and inconclusive due to the poor methodological quality of RCTs and the limited number and quality of studies looking at the influence of bias and treatment effects in rehabilitation. Further studies about the influence of bias in RCTs on rehabilitation intervention effect estimates are needed.

Efficacy and Acceptance of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Adults with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The systematic aggregation of research on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) needs an update. Although meta-analyses evaluating interventions typically focus on symptom reduction, they should also consider indicators of treatment acceptability, e.g., drop-out rates.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating CBT in adults with CFS compared to inactive and non-specific control groups were included. First, efficacy was examined, considering fatigue, depression, anxiety, and perceived health. Secondly, drop-out rates through different trial stages were analyzed: Non-completion of all mandatory sessions, drop-out (primary study definition), treatment refusal (non-starters), and average of sessions completed.

RESULT

We included 15 RCTs with 2015 participants. CBT was more effective than controls in fatigue (g = -0.52, 95%CI -0.69 to -0.35), perceived health, depression, and anxiety at post-treatment. At long-term follow-up the effects were maintained for fatigue and anxiety. Rates of non-completion (22%, 95%CI 3-71), drop-out (15%, 95%CI 9-25), and treatment refusal (7%, 95%CI 3-15) were relatively low, with a high average proportion of sessions completed. Total time of therapy moderated the effect on fatigue, while the number of sessions moderated the effect on perceived health. Fatigue severity influenced adherence.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that CBT for CFS is effective in reducing fatigue, fatigue related impairment, and severity of depression and anxiety. Conclusions on efficacy at follow-ups are still limited. However, adherence is high in CBT. The results may help to inform clinical practice. Future research should focus on examining the maintenance of effects, while also emphasizing the importance of treatment acceptance.

The effect of using desktop VR to practice preoperative handovers with the ISBAR approach: a randomized controlled trial

AIM

The aim was to investigate whether second-year undergraduate nursing students practicing the Identification-Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (ISBAR) communication approach in a desktop virtual reality (VR) application had a non-inferior learning outcome compared with the traditional paper-based method when sorting patient information correctly based on the ISBAR structure.

METHODS

A non-inferior parallel group assessor blinded randomized controlled trial, conducted in simulation sessions as part of preparation for clinical placements in March and April 2022. After a 20-minute introductory session, the participants were randomized to self-practice the ISBAR approach for 45 minutes in groups of three in either an interactive desktop VR application (intervention) or traditional paper-based (TP) simulation. The primary outcome concerned the proportion of nursing students who sorted all 11 statements of patient information in the correct ISBAR order within a time limit of 5 min. The predefined, one-sided, non-inferiority limit was 13 percentage points in favor of traditional paper-based simulation.

RESULTS

Of 210 eligible students, 175 (83%) participated and were allocated randomly to the VR (N = 87) or TP (N = 88) group. Practicing in the desktop VR application (36% of everything correct) was non-inferior to the traditional paper-based method (22% everything correct), with a difference of 14.2 percentage points (95% CI 0.7 to 27.1) in favor of VR. The VR group repeated the simulation 0.6 times more (95% CI 0.5 to 0.7). Twenty percent more (95% CI 6.9 to 31.6) of the students in the VR group reported liked how they practiced. All the other outcomes including the System Usability Scale indicated non-inferiority or were in favor of VR.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-practicing with the ISBAR approach in desktop VR was non-inferior to the traditional paper-based method and gave a superior learning outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN62680352 registered 30/05/2023.

Management of chronic pain secondary to temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVE

We explored the comparative effectiveness of available therapies for chronic pain associated with temporomandibular disorders (TMD).

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and SCOPUS were searched to May 2021, and again in January 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Interventional RCTs that enrolled patients presenting with chronic pain associated with TMD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Pairs of reviewers independently identified eligible studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We captured all reported patient-important outcomes, including pain relief, physical functioning, emotional functioning, role functioning, social functioning, sleep quality, and adverse events. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses to summarise the evidence and used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence and categorise interventions from most to least beneficial.

RESULTS

233 trials proved eligible for review, of which 153-enrolling 8713 participants and exploring 59 interventions or combinations of interventions-were included in network meta-analyses. All subsequent effects refer to comparisons with placebo or sham procedures. Effects on pain for eight interventions were supported by high to moderate certainty evidence. The three therapies probably most effective for pain relief were cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) augmented with biofeedback or relaxation therapy (risk difference (RD) for achieving the minimally important difference (MID) in pain relief of 1 cm on a 10 cm visual analogue scale: 36% (95% CI 33 to 39)), therapist-assisted jaw mobilisation (RD 36% (95% CI 31 to 40)), and manual trigger point therapy (RD 32% (29 to 34)). Five interventions were less effective, yet more effective than placebo, showing RDs ranging between 23% and 30%: CBT, supervised postural exercise, supervised jaw exercise and stretching, supervised jaw exercise and stretching with manual trigger point therapy, and usual care (such as home exercises, self stretching, reassurance).Moderate certainty evidence showed four interventions probably improved physical functioning: supervised jaw exercise and stretching (RD for achieving the MID of 5 points on the short form-36 physical component summary score: 43% (95% CI 33 to 51)), manipulation (RD 43% (25 to 56)), acupuncture (RD 42% (33 to 50)), and supervised jaw exercise and mobilisation (RD 36% (19 to 51)). The evidence for pain relief or physical functioning among other interventions, and all evidence for adverse events, was low or very low certainty.

CONCLUSION

When restricted to moderate or high certainty evidence, interventions that promote coping and encourage movement and activity were found to be most effective for reducing chronic TMD pain.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021258567).

Anomalies in the review process and interpretation of the evidence in the NICE guideline for chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a disabling long-term condition of unknown cause. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a guideline in 2021 that highlighted the seriousness of the condition, but also recommended that graded exercise therapy (GET) should not be used and cognitive-behavioural therapy should only be used to manage symptoms and reduce distress, not to aid recovery. This U-turn in recommendations from the previous 2007 guideline is controversial.We suggest that the controversy stems from anomalies in both processing and interpretation of the evidence by the NICE committee. The committee: (1) created a new definition of CFS/ME, which 'downgraded' the certainty of trial evidence; (2) omitted data from standard trial end points used to assess efficacy; (3) discounted trial data when assessing treatment harm in favour of lower quality surveys and qualitative studies; (4) minimised the importance of fatigue as an outcome; (5) did not use accepted practices to synthesise trial evidence adequately using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations trial evidence); (6) interpreted GET as mandating fixed increments of change when trials defined it as collaborative, negotiated and symptom dependent; (7) deviated from NICE recommendations of rehabilitation for related conditions, such as chronic primary pain and (8) recommended an energy management approach in the absence of supportive research evidence.We conclude that the dissonance between this and the previous guideline was the result of deviating from usual scientific standards of the NICE process. The consequences of this are that patients may be denied helpful treatments and therefore risk persistent ill health and disability.

Short-term and long-term effectiveness of acupuncture and Tuina on knee osteoarthritis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The effectiveness of acupuncture and tuina in treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is still controversial, which limits their clinical application in practice. This study aims to evaluate the short-term and long-term effectiveness of acupuncture and tuina on KOA.

Methods/design

This parallel-group, multicenter randomized clinical trial (RCT) will be conducted at the outpatient clinic of five traditional Chinese medicine hospitals in China. Three hundred and thirty participants with KOA will be randomly assigned to acupuncture, tuina, or home-based exercise group with a ratio of 1:1:1. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants achieving a minimal clinically important improvement defined as a ≥ 12% reduction on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain dimension on short term (week 8) and long term (week 26) compared with baseline. Secondary outcomes are knee joint conditions (pain, function, and stiffness), self-efficacy of arthritis, quality of life, and psychological conditions, which will be evaluated by the WOMAC score and the Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and in addition, the respondents index of OMERACT-OARSI, Short Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12), arthritis self-efficacy scale, and European five-dimensional health scale (EQ-5D). Adverse events will be collected by self-reported questionnaires predefined.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.chictr.org.cn.

Detection bias in open-label trials of anticancer drugs: a meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVES

In anticancer clinical trials, particularly open-label trials, central reviewers are recommended to evaluate progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) to avoid detection bias of local investigators. However, it is not clear whether the bias has been adequately identified, or to what extent it consistently distorts the results. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the detection bias in oncological open-label trials by confirming whether local investigators overestimate the PFS and ORR compared with the findings of central reviewers.

DESIGN

Meta-epidemiological study.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE via PubMed from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Open-label, parallel-group superiority, randomised trials of anticancer drugs that adjudicated PFS or ORR by both central reviewers and local investigators.

REVIEW METHODS

We assessed the values for the same outcome (PFS and ORR) adjudicated by both central reviewers and local investigators. A random-effects model was used to estimate the ratio of HR (RHR) for PFS and the ratio of OR (ROR) for ORR between central reviewers and local investigators. An RHR lower than 1 and an ROR higher than 1 indicated an overestimation of the effect estimated by local investigators.

RESULTS

We retrieved 1197 records of oncological open-label trials after full-text screening. We identified 171 records (PFS: 149 records, ORR: 136 records) in which both central reviewers and local investigators were used, and included 114 records (PFS: 92 records, ORR: 74 records) for meta-analyses. While the RHR for PFS was 0.95 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.98), the ROR of ORR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.09). The results remained unchanged in the prespecified sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-epidemiological study found that overestimation of local investigators has a small impact on evaluating PFS and ORR in oncological open-label trials. However, a limitation of this study is that it did not include data from all trials; hence, the results may not fully evaluate detection bias. The necessity of central reviewers in oncological open-label trials needs to be assessed by further studies that overcome this limitation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTR-UMIN000044623.

Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death globally. Traditionally, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are offered to individuals after cardiac events to aid recovery and prevent further cardiac illness. Home-based and technology-supported cardiac rehabilitation programmes have been introduced in an attempt to widen access and participation, especially during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009, 2015, and 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of home-based (which may include digital/telehealth interventions) and supervised centre-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality and morbidity, exercise-capacity, health-related quality of life, and modifiable cardiac risk factors in patients with heart disease SEARCH METHODS: We updated searches from the previous Cochrane Review by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCO) on 16 September 2022. We also searched two clinical trials registers as well as previous systematic reviews and reference lists of included studies. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared centre-based cardiac rehabilitation (e.g. hospital, sports/community centre) with home-based programmes (± digital/telehealth platforms) in adults with myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, or who had undergone revascularisation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all identified references for inclusion based on predefined inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or by involving a third review author. Two authors independently extracted outcome data and study characteristics and assessed risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three new trials in this update, bringing a total of 24 trials that have randomised a total of 3046 participants undergoing cardiac rehabilitation. A further nine studies were identified and are awaiting classification. Manual searching of trial registers until 16 September 2022 revealed a further 14 clinical trial registrations - these are ongoing. Participants had a history of acute myocardial infarction, revascularisation, or heart failure. Although there was little evidence of high risk of bias, a number of studies provided insufficient detail to enable assessment of potential risk of bias; in particular, details of generation and concealment of random allocation sequencing and blinding of outcome assessment were poorly reported. No evidence of a difference was seen between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in our primary outcomes up to 12 months of follow-up: total mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65 to 2.16; participants = 1647; studies = 12/comparisons = 14; low-certainty evidence) or exercise capacity (standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.10, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.04; participants = 2343; studies = 24/comparisons = 28; low-certainty evidence). The majority of evidence (N=71 / 77 comparisons of either total or domain scores) showed no significant difference in health-related quality of life up to 24 months follow-up between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Trials were generally of short duration, with only three studies reporting outcomes beyond 12 months (exercise capacity: SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.23; participants = 1074; studies = 3; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a similar level of trial completion (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.08; participants = 2638; studies = 22/comparisons = 26; low-certainty evidence) between home-based and centre-based participants. The cost per patient of centre- and home-based programmes was similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update supports previous conclusions that home- (± digital/telehealth platforms) and centre-based forms of cardiac rehabilitation formally supported by healthcare staff seem to be similarly effective in improving clinical and health-related quality of life outcomes in patients after myocardial infarction, or revascularisation, or with heart failure. This finding supports the continued expansion of healthcare professional supervised home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes (± digital/telehealth platforms), especially important in the context of the ongoing global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that has much limited patients in face-to-face access of hospital and community health services. Where settings are able to provide both supervised centre- and home-based programmes, consideration of the preference of the individual patient would seem appropriate. Although not included in the scope of this review, there is an increasing evidence base supporting the use of hybrid models that combine elements of both centre-based and home-based cardiac rehabilitation delivery. Further data are needed to determine: (1) whether the short-term effects of home/digital-telehealth and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation models of delivery can be confirmed in the longer term; (2) the relative clinical effectiveness and safety of home-based programmes for other heart patients, e.g. post-valve surgery and atrial fibrillation.

Impact of Allocation Concealment and Blinding in Trials Addressing Treatments for COVID-19: A Methods Study

We aimed to assess the impact of allocation concealment and blinding on the results of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) trials, using the World Health Organization COVID-19 database (to February 2022). We identified 488 randomized trials comparing drug therapeutics with placebo or standard care in patients with COVID-19. We performed random-effects meta-regressions comparing the results of trials with and without allocation concealment and blinding of health-care providers and patients. We found that, compared with trials with allocation concealment, trials without allocation concealment may estimate treatments to be more beneficial for mortality, mechanical ventilation, hospital admission, duration of hospitalization, and duration of mechanical ventilation, but results were imprecise. We did not find compelling evidence that, compared with trials with blinding, trials without blinding produce consistently different results for mortality, mechanical ventilation, and duration of hospitalization. We found that trials without blinding may estimate treatments to be more beneficial for hospitalizations and duration of mechanical ventilation. We did not find compelling evidence that COVID-19 trials in which health-care providers and patients are blinded produce different results from trials without blinding, but trials without allocation concealment estimate treatments to be more beneficial compared with trials with allocation concealment. Our study suggests that lack of blinding may not always bias results but that evidence users should remain skeptical of trials without allocation concealment.

Effect of a home-based isometric handgrip training programme on systolic blood pressure in adults: A randomised assessor-blinded trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of 20 weeks of home-based isometric handgrip training (IHT) compared with usual care on systolic blood pressure (SBP) in adults.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a randomised, controlled, assessor-blinded trial. Participants were randomised to either IHT (intervention group) or usual care (control group).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants randomised to the intervention group performed a session of 16 min of effective workout home-based IHT three times per week for 20 weeks. Participants randomised to the control group were asked to continue their daily activities as usual.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was the difference in SBP between groups over 20 weeks. Secondary outcomes were diastolic blood pressure, heart rate, handgrip strength, and self-administered home blood pressure measures.

RESULTS

Forty-eight adults (mean [SD] age, 64 [8] years) were included in this trial. The adjusted between-group mean difference in SBP was 8.12 mmHg (95% CI 0.24 to 16.01, p = 0.04) - favouring the usual care group. No differences between groups were found in any of the home blood pressure measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial showed that 20 weeks of home-based isometric handgrip training was not superior compared to the usual care in lowering SBP.

Bias in the measurement of the outcome is associated with effect sizes in randomized clinical trials on exercise therapy for chronic low back pain: a meta-epidemiological study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the relationships between the risk of bias and treatment effect estimates for exercise therapy interventions on pain intensity and physical functioning outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with chronic low back pain.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A cross-sectional meta-epidemiological study of the 230 RCTs (31,674 participants) in the 2021 'Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain' Cochrane Review were included. Study design characteristics, sample size, prospective trial registration, flowchart information, interventions, and comparisons were extracted. Independent pairs of reviewers assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool.

RESULTS

The metaregression included 220 (pain intensity) and 203 (physical functioning) effect sizes. Unadjusted and adjusted metaregression models showed no significant associations between the bias domains and pain intensity effect sizes. Only domain 'bias in the measurement of the outcome' was significantly associated with physical functioning (standardized mean difference: -0.40, 95% confidence interval: -0.77 to -0.02) when adjusted for flowchart reported (yes/no), prospective trial registration, sample size, and comparator type.

CONCLUSION

The risk of bias in the measurement of the outcome could lead to slight overestimates of the effect size for physical functioning. Clinicians should consider this when they read and assess RCT results in this field. We encourage metaresearchers to replicate our findings using a consistent approach for evaluating the risk of bias (i.e., the RoB 2 tool) in other musculoskeletal conditions and interventions to investigate their generalizability.

Calreticulin Expression in Human Carcinomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The present study performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on whether calreticulin levels could represent a prognostic factor in carcinoma patients. Calreticulin (CRT) is a multifunctional protein in the endoplasmic reticulum that can play distinct roles in different cancers.

METHODS

The search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Lilacs, Science Direct, Embase, Bireme, and SciELO databases. After a full-text evaluation, only 14 articles remained. The RoBANS tool assessed the risk of bias. The meta-analysis was performed with R software, and the odds ratio (OR) was the effect measure. The random effects model was chosen, and the quality of evidence was evaluated according to GRADE.

RESULT

The most frequent carcinomas were in the breasts and the colon. CRT expression varied according to carcinoma origin and type, but these diseases had a prevalence of high CRT levels, indicating tumor progression. The high CRT levels were associated with lymph node metastasis (OR = 3.06 [1.71; 5.48]/p = 0.0002/I2 = 0%). All included articles had a blinding bias.

CONCLUSION

High CRT levels may represent a prognostic factor for metastatic lymph nodes in carcinoma patients.

Intravenous vs. intraosseous vascular access during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest - protocol for a randomised clinical trial

Objective

During cardiac arrest, current guidelines recommend attempting intravenous access first and to consider intraosseous access if intravenous access is unsuccessful or impossible. However, these recommendations are only based on very low-certainty evidence. Therefore, the "Intravenous vs Intraosseous Vascular Access During Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest" (IVIO) trial aims to determine whether there is a difference in patient outcomes depending on the type of vascular access attempted during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. This current article describes the clinical IVIO trial.

Methods

The IVIO trial is an investigator-initiated, randomised trial of intravenous vs. intraosseous vascular access during adult non-traumatic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Denmark. The intervention will consist of minimum two attempts (if unsuccessful on the first attempt) to successfully establish intravenous or intraosseous vascular access during cardiac arrest. The intraosseous group will be further randomised to the humeral or tibial site. The primary outcome is sustained return of spontaneous circulation and key secondary outcomes include survival and survival with a favourable neurological outcome at 30 days. A total of 1,470 patients will be included.

Results

The trial started in March 2022 and the last patient is anticipated to be included in the spring of 2024. The primary results will be reported after 90-day follow-up and are anticipated in mid-2024.

Conclusion

The current article describes the design of the Danish IVIO trial. The findings of this trial will help inform future guidelines for selecting the optimal vascular access route during out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Designs used in published therapeutic studies of rare superficial vascular anomalies: a systematic literature search

BACKGROUND

Rare superficial vascular anomalies represent a wide range of diseases. Their management is difficult given the broad spectrum and the lack of clinical trials assessing treatment efficacy. A randomized clinical trial of vascular anomalies is difficult because of the rarity of the diseases and is enhanced by the population of interest often being children. Therefore, suitable designs are needed. We conducted a methodological systematic literature search to identify designs implemented for investigating the treatment of rare superficial vascular anomalies.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on January 25, 2021, of the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and European Union Clinical Trials Register databases. This systematic methodological literature search was registered at the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42021232449). Randomized and non-randomized studies were included if they met the following criteria: were prospective studies of rare superficial vascular anomaly therapies, dealt with humans (adults and children) and were published in English from 2000. We excluded case reports/case series reporting fewer than 10 patients, reviews, retrospective studies, animal studies, studies of systemic or common vascular anomalies and non-therapeutic studies. We did not assess risk of bias in the included studies because our review was a methodological one focused on the design used. The review provided a descriptive analysis of relevant features of eligible research studies.

RESULTS

From 2046 articles identified, we included 97 studies (62 reports and 35 ongoing studies): 25 randomized controlled studies, 7 non-randomized comparative studies, 64 prospective cohorts and 1 case series. Among the 32 comparative studies included, 21 used a parallel-group design. The 11 other studies used different designs such as cross-over, randomized placebo phase, delayed-start, within-person, or challenge-dechallenge-rechallenge or used a historical control group or an observational run-in period.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic literature search highlights the lack of randomized control trials in superficial vascular anomalies due to the rarity of patients and their heterogeneity. New designs are emerging and can overcome the limitations of testing treatments in parallel groups.

Platform adaptive trial of novel antivirals for early treatment of COVID-19 In the community (PANORAMIC): protocol for a randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial of community novel antiviral treatment of COVID-19 in people at increased risk of more severe disease

INTRODUCTION

There is an urgent need to determine the safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of novel antiviral treatments for COVID-19 in vaccinated patients in the community at increased risk of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PANORAMIC is a UK-wide, open-label, prospective, adaptive, multiarm platform, randomised clinical trial that evaluates antiviral treatments for COVID-19 in the community. A master protocol governs the addition of new antiviral treatments as they become available, and the introduction and cessation of existing interventions via interim analyses. The first two interventions to be evaluated are molnupiravir (Lagevrio) and nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

community-dwelling within 5 days of onset of symptomatic COVID-19 (confirmed by PCR or lateral flow test), and either (1) aged 50 years and over, or (2) aged 18-49 years with qualifying comorbidities. Registration occurs via the trial website and by telephone. Recruitment occurs remotely through the central trial team, or in person through clinical sites. Participants are randomised to receive either usual care or a trial drug plus usual care. Outcomes are collected via a participant-completed daily electronic symptom diary for 28 days post randomisation. Participants and/or their Trial Partner are contacted by the research team after days 7, 14 and 28 if the diary is not completed, or if the participant is unable to access the diary. The primary efficacy endpoint is all-cause, non-elective hospitalisation and/or death within 28 days of randomisation. Multiple prespecified interim analyses allow interventions to be stopped for futility or superiority based on prespecified decision criteria. A prospective economic evaluation is embedded within the trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval granted by South Central-Berkshire REC number: 21/SC/0393; IRAS project ID: 1004274. Results will be presented to policymakers and at conferences, and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN30448031; EudraCT number: 2021-005748-31.

Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study

Objective

To assess how inadequate reporting of cointerventions influences estimated treatment effects in recent cardiovascular trials.

Methods

Medline/Embase were systematically searched from January 1, 2011 to July 1, 2021 for trials evaluating pharmacologic interventions on clinical cardiovascular outcomes published in 5 high-impact journals. Information on adequate vs inadequate reporting of cointerventions, blinding, risk of bias due to deviations of intended interventions (low vs high/some concerns), funding (nonindustry vs industry), design (superiority vs noninferiority), and results were assessed by 2 reviewers. The association with effect sizes was assessed using meta-regression random-effect analysis, expressed as ratios of odds ratios (ROR). RORs of >1.0 indicated that trials with the methodological factor pointing to lower quality report larger treatment estimates.

Results

In total, 164 trials were included. Of the 164 trials, 124 (74%) did not adequately report cointerventions; 89 of the 164 trials (54%) provided no information regarding cointerventions, and 70 of the 164 (43%) were at risk of bias due to inadequate blinding. Moreover, 86 of the 164 (53%) were at risk of bias due to deviation of intended interventions. Of the 164 trials, 144 (88%) were funded by the industries. Trials with inadequate reporting of cointerventions had larger treatment estimates for the primary end point (ROR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.15; I²=0%). No significant association with results for blinding (ROR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; I²=66%), deviation of intended interventions (ROR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.92-1.04; I²=0%), or funding (ROR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.09; I²=0%) was found.

Conclusion

We conclude that trials with inadequate reporting of cointerventions showed larger treatment effect estimates, potentially indicating overestimation of therapeutic benefit.

Trial Registration

Prospero Identifier: CRD42017072522.

Meta-epidemiology and the MetaBLIND study: Response to Tack

In 2020 we published MetaBLIND, a large meta-epidemiological study on the impact of masking on effect estimates in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). While masking is an established methodological practice in RCTs it is not clear to what extent results of non-masked RCTs are biased. Surprisingly, we found no evidence of an impact of masking on effect estimates, on average. Michiel Tack commented on the MetaBLIND study, and here we respond. The issues he raised were examples of standard themes when interpreting meta-epidemiological studies, which we have discussed at some length elsewhere, and did not warrant change of our conclusion. We maintain that the MetaBLIND results do not provide a sufficient basis for recommending abandoning masking as a methodological safeguard.

Effects of long-term oxygen therapy on the mental state of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to examine the effects of long-term oxygen therapy on the mental state of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

METHODS

Web of Science, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library were selected to search for relevant studies. We followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, adopted the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and synthesized the outcomes narratively with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations evidence profile.

RESULTS

Six studies were included. Moderate quality of evidence supported no effects of long-term oxygen therapy on the mental state in patients with severe resting hypoxemia and moderate resting hypoxemia (or exertional desaturation) at follow-up of 6 to 12 months; however, adverse effects on mental state among patients with moderate resting or exertional desaturation were reported at the follow-up of 36 to 48 months.

DISCUSSION

Nurses should focus on the mental state of patients treated with long-term oxygen therapy, especially those who use it for a prolonged time. Due to ethical constraints in this study, a quasi-experimental study with faithful consideration of internal validity can be commenced in the future.

Piperacillin-Tazobactam Compared With Cefoxitin as Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Pancreatoduodenectomy: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Despite improvements in perioperative mortality, the incidence of postoperative surgical site infection (SSI) remains high after pancreatoduodenectomy. The effect of broad-spectrum antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis in reducing SSI is poorly understood.

Objective

To define the effect of broad-spectrum perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis on postoperative SSI incidence compared with standard care antibiotics.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Pragmatic, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 3 clinical trial at 26 hospitals across the US and Canada. Participants were enrolled between November 2017 and August 2021, with follow-up through December 2021. Adults undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy for any indication were eligible. Individuals were excluded if they had allergies to study medications, active infections, chronic steroid use, significant kidney dysfunction, or were pregnant or breastfeeding. Participants were block randomized in a 1:1 ratio and stratified by the presence of a preoperative biliary stent. Participants, investigators, and statisticians analyzing trial data were unblinded to treatment assignment.

Intervention

The intervention group received piperacillin-tazobactam (3.375 or 4 g intravenously) as perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis, while the control group received cefoxitin (2 g intravenously; standard care).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was development of postoperative SSI within 30 days. Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, development of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula, and sepsis. All data were collected as part of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Results

The trial was terminated at an interim analysis on the basis of a predefined stopping rule. Of 778 participants (378 in the piperacillin-tazobactam group [median age, 66.8 y; 233 {61.6%} men] and 400 in the cefoxitin group [median age, 68.0 y; 223 {55.8%} men]), the percentage with SSI at 30 days was lower in the perioperative piperacillin-tazobactam vs cefoxitin group (19.8% vs 32.8%; absolute difference, -13.0% [95% CI, -19.1% to -6.9%]; P < .001). Participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam, vs cefoxitin, had lower rates of postoperative sepsis (4.2% vs 7.5%; difference, -3.3% [95% CI, -6.6% to 0.0%]; P = .02) and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (12.7% vs 19.0%; difference, -6.3% [95% CI, -11.4% to -1.2%]; P = .03). Mortality rates at 30 days were 1.3% (5/378) among participants treated with piperacillin-tazobactam and 2.5% (10/400) among those receiving cefoxitin (difference, -1.2% [95% CI, -3.1% to 0.7%]; P = .32).

Conclusions and Relevance

In participants undergoing open pancreatoduodenectomy, use of piperacillin-tazobactam as perioperative prophylaxis reduced postoperative SSI, pancreatic fistula, and multiple downstream sequelae of SSI. The findings support the use of piperacillin-tazobactam as standard care for open pancreatoduodenectomy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03269994.

A comparison between clinical decision support system and clinicians in breast cancer

Objective

We are building a clinical decision support system (CSCO AI) for breast cancer patients to improve the efficiency of clinical decision-making. We aimed to assess cancer treatment regimens given by CSCO AI and different levels of clinicians.

Methods

400 breast cancer patients were screened from the CSCO database. Clinicians with similar levels were randomly assigned one of the volumes (200 cases). CSCO AI was asked to assess all cases. Three reviewers were independently asked to evaluate the regimens from clinicians and CSCO AI. Regimens were masked before evaluation. The primary outcome was the proportion of high-level conformity (HLC).

Results

The overall concordance between clinicians and CSCO AI was 73.9% (3621/4900). It was 78.8% (2757/3500) in the early-stage, higher than that in the metastatic stage (61.7% [864/1400], p < 0.001). The concordance was 90.7% (635/700) and 56.4% (395/700) in adjuvant radiotherapy and second-line therapy respectively. HLC in CSCO AI was 95.8% (95%CI:94.0%-97.6%), significantly higher than that in clinicians (90.8%, 95%CI:89.8%-91.8%). Considering professions, the HLC of surgeons was 85.9%, lower than that of CSCO AI (OR = 0.25,95%CI: 0.16-0.41). The most significant difference in HLC was in first-line therapy (OR = 0.06, 95%CI:0.01-0.41). When clinicians were divided according to their levels, there was no statistical significance between CSCO AI and higher level clinicians.

Conclusions

Decision from CSCO AI for breast cancer was superior than most clinicians did except in second-line therapy. The improvements in process outcomes suggest that CSCO AI can be widely used in clinical practice.

The Effectiveness of Intraosseous Basivertebral Nerve Ablation in the Treatment of Nonradiating Vertebrogenic Pain: A Systematic Review

Intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation has shown sustained efficacy in treating chronic axial low back pain (LBP) in patients with type 1 or 2 Modic changes. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy of intraosseous basivertebral nerve radiofrequency ablation in treating nonradiating axial chronic LBP compared to standard therapy, sham, or without contrast. The population of interest is individuals greater than or equal to 18 years old with chronic nonradiating vertebrogenic pain. The key outcome was the percentage of patients with greater than or equal to 50% pain reduction, greater than or equal to 10-point improvement in function and disability measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), greater than or equal to two-point pain reduction in the visual analog scale (VAS) or numerical pain rating scale, and a decrease in opioid utilization by 10 morphine milligram equivalents. Three databases, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar, were used to retrieve the studies for the review. Two independent reviewers assessed the studies for inclusion using the validated tools for quality appraisal. There were 286 articles in total; however, only 11 publications with extensive data on 413 participants matched the inclusion criteria and were used for this review. At three months, a majority of the participants reported greater than or equal to 10-point improvement in the ODI, a measure of functional and disability improvement on a 10-point scale, and greater than or equal to two-point improvement in the VAS. A good number of patients in the basivertebral nerve ablation (BVNA) arm reported complete pain resolution demonstrating therapy success and the superiority of BVNA over sham and standard treatment.  Basivertebral nerve radiofrequency ablation, among other criteria, is a safe and minimally invasive therapy that significantly lowers pain and impairment in individuals with vertebrogenic pain with distinct Modic type 1 and 2 changes at lumbar vertebra three-sacral vertebra one (L3-S1) vertebral levels. Proper patient selection and exact procedural methods are essential to the success of basivertebral nerve neurotomy. The findings of the existing investigations require confirmation by nonindustry-funded, large-scale, high-quality trials using generalizable study participants.

MetAAA trial patients show superior quality of life compared to patients under regular surveillance for small AAA: a single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a multifactorial vascular disease associated with high morbidity and mortality. Currently, surgical intervention is the only treatment option, and there is no drug therapy available for AAA. Hence, surveillance of AAA until indication for surgery may impact patient quality of life (QoL). There is a paucity of high-quality observational data on health status and QoL, particularly among AAA patients participating in randomized controlled trials. The objective of this study was to compare the QoL scores of AAA patients on surveillance to those of AAA patients enrolled in the MetAAA trial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Overall, 54 MetAAA trial patients and 23 AAA patients under regular surveillance for small AAA (part of a longitudinal monitoring study) were asked to complete three established and validated (in total 561 longitudinally collected) QoL questionnaires: the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), the Aneurysm Symptom Rating Questionnaire (ASRQ), and the Aneurysm-Dependent Quality of Life questionnaire (ADQoL).

RESULTS

A superior health status and QoL was found in AAA patients participating in the MetAAA trial compared to AAA patients under regular surveillance. In detail, MetAAA trial patients showed superior general health perception ( P =0.012), higher energy level ( P =0.036) as well as enhanced emotional well-being ( P =0.044) and fewer limitations due to general malaise ( P =0.021), which was subsequently reflected in an overall superior current QoL score ( P =0.039) compared to AAA patients under regular surveillance.

CONCLUSION

AAA patients enrolled in the MetAAA trial showed superior health status and QoL compared to AAA patients under regular surveillance.

Multimodal Physical Exercise and Functional Rehabilitation Program in Oncological Patients with Cancer-Related Fatigue-A Randomized Clinical Trial

The increase in life expectancy and survival time implies an increase in the possible side-effects of pharmacological treatments in patients. Cancer-related fatigue is one of these side-effects. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of a multimodal program of physical exercise and functional rehabilitation on asthenia, pain, functional capacity, and quality of life in cancer patients with cancer-related fatigue.

METHODS

This was a randomized, parallel-controlled clinical trial, with two arms (experimental and control group), and it was conducted over the course of a year in the Oncology Hospitalization Unit at the University Hospital of Salamanca, Spain. Participants (n = 48) were assessed at three points during the study. The first assessment was prior to hospital discharge, the second assessment was after 15 days, and the final assessment was at one month post-hospital follow-up. The intervention lasted one month. The main variables studied were the dependency levels (Barthel), cancer-related fatigue (FACT-An), health-related quality of life (EuroQoL-5D), functional capacity (SPPB), and kinesiophobia (TSK-F).

RESULTS

Sample size (n = 44). Mean age 63.46 ± 12.36 years. Significant differences between control and experimental group participants in Barthel, FACT-An, TSK-F, and SPPB scores at follow-up and final assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

There are beneficial effects of a multimodal physical exercise and functional rehabilitation program in improving the autonomy of cancer-related fatigue patients.

Impact of active placebo controls on estimated drug effects in randomised trials: a systematic review of trials with both active placebo and standard placebo

BACKGROUND

An estimated 60% of pharmacological randomised trials use placebo control interventions to blind (i.e. mask) participants. However, standard placebos do not control for perceptible non-therapeutic effects (i.e. side effects) of the experimental drug, which may unblind participants. Trials rarely use active placebo controls, which contain pharmacological compounds designed to mimic the non-therapeutic experimental drug effects in order to reduce the risk of unblinding. A relevant improvement in the estimated effects of active placebo compared with standard placebo would imply that trials with standard placebo may overestimate experimental drug effects.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to estimate the difference in drug effects when an experimental drug is compared with an active placebo versus a standard placebo control intervention, and to explore causes for heterogeneity. In the context of a randomised trial, this difference in drug effects can be estimated by directly comparing the effect difference between the active placebo and standard placebo intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, two other databases, and two trial registries up to October 2020. We also searched reference lists and citations and contacted trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared an active placebo versus a standard placebo intervention. We considered trials both with and without a matching experimental drug arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data, assessed risk of bias, scored active placebos for adequacy and risk of unintended therapeutic effect, and categorised active placebos as unpleasant, neutral, or pleasant. We requested individual participant data from the authors of four cross-over trials published after 1990 and one unpublished trial registered after 1990. Our primary inverse-variance, random-effects meta-analysis used standardised mean differences (SMDs) of active versus standard placebo for participant-reported outcomes at earliest post-treatment assessment. A negative SMD favoured the active placebo. We stratified analyses by trial type (clinical or preclinical) and supplemented with sensitivity and subgroup analyses and meta-regression. In secondary analyses, we investigated observer-reported outcomes, harms, attrition, and co-intervention outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 trials (1462 participants). We obtained individual participant data from four trials. Our primary analysis of participant-reported outcomes at earliest post-treatment assessment resulted in a pooled SMD of -0.08 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.20 to 0.04; I2 = 31%; 14 trials), with no clear difference between clinical and preclinical trials. Individual participant data contributed 43% of the weight of this analysis. Two of seven sensitivity analyses found more pronounced and statistically significant differences; for example, in the five trials with low overall risk of bias, the pooled SMD was -0.24 (95% CI -0.34 to -0.13). The pooled SMD of observer-reported outcomes was similar to the primary analysis. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for harms was 3.08 (95% CI 1.56 to 6.07), and for attrition, 1.22 (95% CI 0.74 to 2.03). Co-intervention data were limited. Meta-regression found no statistically significant association with adequacy of the active placebo or risk of unintended therapeutic effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a statistically significant difference between active and standard placebo control interventions in our primary analysis, but the result was imprecise and the CI compatible with a difference ranging from important to irrelevant. Furthermore, the result was not robust, because two sensitivity analyses produced a more pronounced and statistically significant difference. We suggest that trialists and users of information from trials carefully consider the type of placebo control intervention in trials with high risk of unblinding, such as those with pronounced non-therapeutic effects and participant-reported outcomes.

(Cost-)effectiveness of a personalized multidisciplinary eHealth intervention for knee arthroplasty patients to enhance return to activities of daily life, work and sports - rationale and protocol of the multicentre ACTIVE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

With the worldwide rising obesity epidemic and the aging population, it is essential to deliver (cost-)effective care that results in enhanced societal participation among knee arthroplasty patients. The purpose of this study is to describe the development, content, and protocol of our (cost-)effectiveness study that assesses a perioperative integrated care program, including a personalized eHealth app, for knee arthroplasty patients aimed to enhance societal participation post-surgery compared to care as usual.

METHODS

The intervention will be tested in a multicentre randomized controlled trial with eleven participating Dutch medical centers (i.e., hospitals and clinics). Working patients on the waiting-list for a total- or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with the intention to return to work after surgery will be included. After pre-stratification on medical centre with or without eHealth as usual care, operation procedure (total- or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty) and recovery expectations regarding return to work, randomization will take place at the patient-level. A minimum of 138 patients will be included in both the intervention and control group, 276 in total. The control group will receive usual care. On top of care as usual, patients in the intervention group will receive an intervention consisting of three components: 1) a personalized eHealth intervention called ikHerstel ('I Recover') including an activity tracker, 2) goal setting using goal attainment scaling to improve rehabilitation and 3) a referral to a case-manager. Our main outcome is quality of life, based on patient-reported physical functioning (using PROMIS-PF). (Cost-)effectiveness will be assessed from a healthcare and societal perspective. Data collection has been started in 2020 and is expected to finish in 2024.

DISCUSSION

Improving societal participation for knee arthroplasty is relevant for patients, health care providers, employers and society. This multicentre randomized controlled trial will evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of a personalized integrated care program for knee arthroplasty patients, consisting of effective intervention components based on previous studies, compared to care as usual.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trialsearch.who.int; reference no. NL8525, reference date version 1: 14-04-2020.

Blinding and sham control methods in trials of physical, psychological, and self-management interventions for pain (article II): a meta-analysis relating methods to trial results

ABSTRACT

Sham interventions in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of physical, psychological, and self-management (PPS) therapies for pain are highly variable in design and believed to contribute to poor internal validity. However, it has not been formally tested whether the extent to which sham controls resemble the treatment under investigation consistently affects trial outcomes, such as effect sizes, differential attrition, participant expectancy, and blinding effectiveness. Placebo- or sham-controlled RCTs of PPS interventions of clinical pain populations were searched in 12 databases. The similarity of control interventions to the experimental treatment was rated across 25 features. Meta-regression analyses assessed putative links between employed control interventions, observed effect sizes in pain-related outcomes, attrition, and blinding success. The sample included 198 unique control interventions, dominated by manual therapy and chronic musculoskeletal pain research. Meta-analyses indicated small-to-moderate benefits of active treatments over control interventions, across subgroups of manual therapies, exercise, and rehabilitation, and psychological intervention trials. Multiple meta-regression modelling demonstrated that similarity between sham control and tested interventions predicted variability in pain-related outcomes, attrition, and blinding effectiveness. Influential variables were differences relating to the extent of intervention exposure, participant experience, and treatment environments. The results support the supposed link between blinding methods and effect sizes, based on a large and systematically sourced overview of methods. However, challenges to effective blinding are complex and often difficult to discern from trial reports. Nonetheless, these insights have the potential to change trial design, conduct, and reporting and will inform guideline development.

Blinding and sham control methods in trials of physical, psychological, and self-management interventions for pain (article I): a systematic review and description of methods

ABSTRACT

Blinding is challenging in randomised controlled trials of physical, psychological, and self-management therapies for pain, mainly because of their complex and participatory nature. To develop standards for the design, implementation, and reporting of control interventions in efficacy and mechanistic trials, a systematic overview of currently used sham interventions and other blinding methods was required. Twelve databases were searched for placebo or sham-controlled randomised clinical trials of physical, psychological, and self-management treatments in a clinical pain population. Screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate, and trial features, description of control methods, and their similarity to the active intervention under investigation were extracted (protocol registration ID: CRD42020206590). The review included 198 unique control interventions, published between 2008 and December 2021. Most trials studied people with chronic pain, and more than half were manual therapy trials. The described control interventions ranged from clearly modelled based on the active treatment to largely dissimilar control interventions. Similarity between control and active interventions was more frequent for certain aspects (eg, duration and frequency of treatments) than others (eg, physical treatment procedures and patient sensory experiences). We also provide an overview of additional, potentially useful methods to enhance blinding, as well as the reporting of processes involved in developing control interventions. A comprehensive picture of prevalent blinding methods is provided, including a detailed assessment of the resemblance between active and control interventions. These findings can inform future developments of control interventions in efficacy and mechanistic trials and best-practice recommendations.

Splinting for carpal tunnel syndrome

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a compression neuropathy of the median nerve causing pain and numbness and tingling typically in the thumb, index and middle finger. It sometimes results in muscle wasting, diminished sensitivity and loss of dexterity. Splinting the wrist (with or without the hand) using an orthosis is usually offered to people with mild-to-moderate findings, but its effectiveness remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of splinting for people with CTS.

SEARCH METHODS

On 12 December 2021, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP with no limitations. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials were included if the effect of splinting could be isolated from other treatment modalities. The comparisons included splinting versus no active treatment (or placebo), splinting versus another disease-modifying non-surgical treatment, and comparisons of different splint-wearing regimens. We excluded studies comparing splinting with surgery or one splint design with another. We excluded participants if they had previously undergone surgical release.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed study risk of bias and the certainty in the body of evidence for primary outcomes using the GRADE approach, according to standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 trials randomising 1937 adults with CTS. The trials ranged from 21 to 234 participants, with mean ages between 42 and 60 years. The mean duration of CTS symptoms was seven weeks to five years. Eight studies with 523 hands compared splinting with no active intervention (no treatment, sham-kinesiology tape or sham-laser); 20 studies compared splinting (or splinting delivered along with another non-surgical intervention) with another non-surgical intervention; and three studies compared different splinting regimens (e.g. night-time only versus full time). Trials were generally at high risk of bias for one or more domains, including lack of blinding (all included studies) and lack of information about randomisation or allocation concealment in 23 studies. For the primary comparison, splinting compared to no active treatment, splinting may provide little or no benefits in symptoms in the short term (< 3 months). The mean Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) (scale 1 to 5, higher is worse; minimal clinically important difference (MCID) 1 point) was 0.37 points better with splint (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 better to 0.08 worse; 6 studies, 306 participants; low-certainty evidence) compared with no active treatment. Removing studies with high or unclear risk of bias due to lack of randomisation or allocation concealment supported our conclusion of no important effect (mean difference (MD) 0.01 points worse with splint; 95% CI 0.20 better to 0.22 worse; 3 studies, 124 participants). In the long term (> 3 months), we are uncertain about the effect of splinting on symptoms (mean BCTQ SSS 0.64 better with splinting; 95% CI 1.2 better to 0.08 better; 2 studies, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Splinting probably does not improve hand function in the short term and may not improve hand function in the long term. In the short term, the mean BCTQ Functional Status Scale (FSS) (1 to 5, higher is worse; MCID 0.7 points) was 0.24 points better (95% CI 0.44 better to 0.03 better; 6 studies, 306 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) with splinting compared with no active treatment. In the long term, the mean BCTQ FSS was 0.25 points better (95% CI 0.68 better to 0.18 worse; 1 study, 34 participants; low-certainty evidence) with splinting compared with no active treatment. Night-time splinting may result in a higher rate of overall improvement in the short term (risk ratio (RR) 3.86, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.51; 1 study, 80 participants; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 2, 95% CI 2 to 2; low-certainty evidence).  We are uncertain if splinting decreases referral to surgery, RR 0.47 (95% CI 0.14 to 1.58; 3 studies, 243 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Low-certainty evidence from one study suggests that splinting may have a higher rate of adverse events, which were transient, but the 95% CIs included no effect. Seven of 40 participants (18%) reported adverse effects in the splinting group and 0 of 40 participants (0%) in the no active treatment group (RR 15.0, 95% CI 0.89 to 254.13; 1 study, 80 participants).  There was low- to moderate-certainty evidence for the other comparisons: splinting may not provide additional benefits in symptoms or hand function when given together with corticosteroid injection (moderate-certainty evidence) or with rehabilitation (low-certainty evidence); nor when compared with corticosteroid (injection or oral; low certainty), exercises (low certainty), kinesiology taping (low certainty), rigid taping (low certainty), platelet-rich plasma (moderate certainty), or extracorporeal shock wave treatment (moderate certainty). Splinting for 12 weeks may not be better than six weeks, but six months of splinting may be better than six weeks of splinting in improving symptoms and function (low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether splinting benefits people with CTS. Limited evidence does not exclude small improvements in CTS symptoms and hand function, but they may not be clinically important, and the clinical relevance of small differences with splinting is unclear. Low-certainty evidence suggests that people may have a greater chance of experiencing overall improvement with night-time splints than no treatment. As splinting is a relatively inexpensive intervention with no plausible long-term harms, small effects could justify its use, particularly when patients are not interested in having surgery or injections. It is unclear if a splint is optimally worn full time or at night-time only and whether long-term use is better than short-term use, but low-certainty evidence suggests that the benefits may manifest in the long term.

Effectiveness of analgesic ear drops as add-on treatment to oral analgesics in children with acute otitis media: study protocol of the OPTIMA pragmatic randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Ear pain is the most prominent symptom of childhood acute otitis media (AOM). To control the pain and reduce reliance on antibiotics, evidence of effectiveness for alternative interventions is urgently needed. This trial aims to investigate whether analgesic ear drops added to usual care provide superior ear pain relief over usual care alone in children presenting to primary care with AOM.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a pragmatic, two-arm, individually randomised, open, superiority trial with cost-effectiveness analysis and nested mixed-methods process evaluation in general practices in the Netherlands. We aim to recruit 300 children aged 1-6 years with a general practitioner (GP) diagnosis of AOM and ear pain. Children will be randomly allocated (ratio 1:1) to either (1) lidocaine hydrochloride 5 mg/g ear drops (Otalgan) one to two drops up to six times daily for a maximum of 7 days in addition to usual care (oral analgesics, with/without antibiotics); or (2) usual care. Parents will complete a symptom diary for 4 weeks as well as generic and disease-specific quality of life questionnaires at baseline and 4 weeks. The primary outcome is the parent-reported ear pain score (0-10) over the first 3 days. Secondary outcomes include proportion of children consuming antibiotics, oral analgesic use and overall symptom burden in the first 7 days; number of days with ear pain, number of GP reconsultations and subsequent antibiotic prescribing, adverse events, complications of AOM and cost-effectiveness during 4-week follow-up; generic and disease-specific quality of life at 4 weeks; parents' and GPs' views and experiences with treatment acceptability, usability and satisfaction.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Medical Research Ethics Committee Utrecht, the Netherlands, has approved the protocol (21-447/G-D). All parents/guardians of participants will provide written informed consent. Study results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at relevant (inter)national scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Netherlands Trial Register: NL9500; date of registration: 28 May 2021. At the time of publication of the study protocol paper, we were unable to make any amendments to the trial registration record in the Netherlands Trial Register. The addition of a data sharing plan was required to adhere to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines. The trial was therefore reregistered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05651633; date of registration: 15 December 2022). This second registration is for modification purposes only and the Netherlands Trial Register record (NL9500) should be regarded as the primary trial registration.

Estimating the effect of COVID-19 on trial design characteristics: a registered report

There have been reports of poor-quality research during the COVID-19 pandemic. This registered report assessed design characteristics of registered clinical trials for COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 trials to empirically explore the design of clinical research during a pandemic and how it compares to research conducted in non-pandemic times. We did a retrospective cohort study with a 1 : 1 ratio of interventional COVID-19 registrations to non-COVID-19 registrations, with four trial design outcomes: use of control arm, randomization, blinding and prospective registration. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio of investigating COVID-19 versus not COVID-19 and estimate direct and total effects of investigating COVID-19 for each outcome. The primary analysis showed a positive direct and total effect of COVID-19 on the use of control arms and randomization. It showed a negative direct effect of COVID-19 on blinding but no evidence of a total effect. There was no evidence of an effect on prospective registration. Taken together with secondary and sensitivity analyses, our findings are inconclusive but point towards a higher prevalence of key design characteristics in COVID-19 trials versus controls. The findings do not support much existing COVID-19 research quality literature, which generally suggests that COVID-19 led to a reduction in quality. Limitations included some data quality issues, minor deviations from the pre-registered plan and the fact that trial registrations were analysed which may not accurately reflect study design and conduct. Following in-principle acceptance, the approved stage 1 version of this manuscript was pre-registered on the Open Science Framework at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/5YAEB. This pre-registration was performed prior to data analysis.

Long-Term Effectiveness of a Smartphone App and a Smart Band on Arterial Stiffness and Central Hemodynamic Parameters in a Population with Overweight and Obesity (Evident 3 Study): Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

mHealth technologies could help to improve cardiovascular health; however, their effect on arterial stiffness and hemodynamic parameters has not been explored to date.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a mHealth intervention, at 3 and 12 months, on arterial stiffness and central hemodynamic parameters in a sedentary population with overweight and obesity.

METHODS

Randomised controlled clinical trial (Evident 3 study). 253 subjects were included: 127 in the intervention group (IG) and 126 in the control group (CG). The IG subjects were briefed on the use of the Evident 3 app and a smart band (Mi Band 2, Xiaomi) for 3 months to promote healthy lifestyles. All measurements were recorded in the baseline visit and at 3 and 12 months. The carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) and the central hemodynamic parameters were measured using a SphigmoCor System^® device, whereas the brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) and the Cardio Ankle Vascular Index (CAVI) were measured using a VaSera VS-2000^® device.

RESULTS

Of the 253 subjects who attended the initial visit, 237 (93.7%) completed the visit at 3 months of the intervention, and 217 (85.3%) completed the visit at 12 months of the intervention. At 12 months, IG showed a decrease in peripheral augmentation index (PAIx) (-3.60; 95% CI -7.22 to -0.00) and ejection duration (ED) (-0.82; 95% CI -1.36 to -0.27), and an increase in subendocardial viability ratio (SEVR) (5.31; 95% CI 1.18 to 9.44). In CG, cfPWV decreased at 3 months (-0.28 m/s; 95% CI -0.54 to -0.02) and at 12 months (-0.30 m/s, 95% CI -0.54 to -0.05), central diastolic pressure (cDBP) decreased at 12 months (-1.64 mm/Hg; 95% CI -3.19 to -0.10). When comparing the groups we found no differences between any variables analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

In sedentary adults with overweight or obesity, the multicomponent intervention (Smartphone app and an activity-tracking band) for 3 months did not modify arterial stiffness or the central hemodynamic parameters, with respect to the control group. However, at 12 months, CG presented a decrease of cfPWV and cDBP, whereas IG showed a decrease of PAIx and ED and an increase of SEVR.

Is laparoscopic excision for superficial peritoneal endometriosis helpful or harmful? Protocol for a double-blinded, randomised, placebo-controlled, three-armed surgical trial

INTRODUCTION

Placebo-controlled surgical designs are recommended to ascertain treatment effects for elective surgeries when there is genuine doubt about the effectiveness of the surgery. Some elective surgeries for pain have been unable to show an effect beyond sham surgery, suggesting contributions from contextual factors. However, the nature of contextual factors in elective surgery is largely unexplored. Further, methodological difficulties in placebo-controlled surgical trials impact the ability to estimate the effectiveness of a surgical procedure. These include an overall lack of testing the success of blinding, absence of comparison to a no-surgery control group and dearth of test for neuropathic pain.For women with peritoneal endometriosis, there is uncertainty regarding the pain-relieving effect of surgery. Surgery may put patients at risk of complications such as postsurgical neuropathic pain, without guarantees of sufficient pelvic pain relief. The planned placebo-controlled trial aims to examine the effect of surgery on pelvic pain, widespread pain and neuropathic pain symptoms in women with peritoneal endometriosis, and to test the contribution of contextual factors to pain relief.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

One hundred women with peritoneal endometriosis will be randomised to either diagnostic laparoscopy with excision of endometrial tissue (active surgery), purely diagnostic laparoscopy (sham surgery) or delayed surgery (no-surgery control group). Outcomes include pelvic pain relief, widespread pain, neuropathic pain symptoms and quality of life. Contextual factors are also assessed. Assessments will be obtained at baseline and 1, 3 and 6 months postrandomisation. Mixed linear models will be used to compare groups over time on all outcome variables.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial is approved by the Regional Ethics Committee in the Central Denmark Region (1-10-72-152-20). The trial is funded by a PhD scholarship from Aarhus University, and supported by a grant from 'Helsefonden' (20-B-0448). Findings will be published in international peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05162794.

Assessment of patient perception of treatment assignment and patient-reported outcomes in a cannabis use disorder trial

Background: Blinding is a cornerstone of trial methodology. Prior work indicates participant-perceived assignment may be associated with trial outcomes. Less is known about how perception changes over time and if this is associated with outcomes.Objectives: To evaluate if participants change their perception of assignment over time in a blinded trial, and if perception is associated with different types of patient-reported outcomes (PROs).Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from the Achieving Cannabis Cessation-Evaluating N-Acetylcysteine Treatment (ACCENT) trial, which evaluated the efficacy of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) relative to placebo for treating cannabis use disorder. Participants (N = 234; 164 men, 70 women) were asked at weeks 5 and 9 what treatment (placebo or NAC) they believed they were receiving. We included PROs proximal (cannabis-associated problems, craving) and distal (anxiety) to the intervention. Analysis was by multiple linear regression and mixed models.Results: Approximately 20% of participants in both arms changed their perception over time. Relative to participants who consistently perceived assignment to placebo, participants who consistently perceived assignment to NAC did not always have comparatively better average scores (coefficient -3.3 [95% CI: -7.0, 0.5]). In some analyses, participants who switched to guessing NAC from placebo had comparatively better average scores (coefficient -3.0 [95% CI: -9.3, 3.4]), but this was inconsistent across outcomes or strata defined by actual assignment or guess accuracy.Conclusion: The study suggests that the proportion of individuals who switch their perception over time is modest. However, this group may influence the estimates of intervention effects on some PROs.

Chronic temporomandibular disorders are associated with higher propensity to develop central sensitization: a case-control study

ABSTRACT

Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) include a group of musculoskeletal disorders that may involve increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons in the central nervous system (ie, central sensitization). To test this hypothesis further, this study examined whether, as compared with healthy subjects, patients with chronic TMD have a greater propensity to develop secondary mechanical hyperalgesia-a phenomenon that can be confidently attributed to central sensitization. In this case-control study, we assessed the area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia induced experimentally by delivering high-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) to the volar forearm skin in 20 participants with chronic TMD and 20 matched healthy controls. High-frequency electrical stimulation consisted in 12 trains of constant-current electrical pulses (5 mA) delivered at 42 Hz. The area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia was evaluated 30 minutes after applying HFS. The area of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia induced by HFS was on average 76% larger in the chronic TMD group (M = 67.7 cm 2 , SD = 28.2) than in the healthy control group (M = 38.4 cm 2 , SD = 14.9; P = 0.0003). Regarding secondary outcomes, there was no group difference in the intensity of secondary mechanical hyperalgesia, but allodynia to cotton after HFS was more frequent in the chronic TMD group. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to show that individuals with chronic TMD have an increased propensity to develop secondary hyperalgesia in a site innervated extratrigeminally. Our results contribute to a better understanding of the pathophysiology of chronic TMD.