1
|
Stokke Hunskaar B, Løvsletten PO, Muller A, Vandvik PO. Interpretation and use of a decision support tool for multiple treatment options: a combined randomised controlled trial and survey of medical students. BMJ Evid Based Med 2024; 29:29-36. [PMID: 37833036 PMCID: PMC10850623 DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2023-112370] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/15/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate medical students' ability to interpret evidence, as well as their self-assessed understandability, perceived usefulness and preferences for design alternatives in an interactive decision support tool, displaying GRADE evidence summaries for multiple treatment options (Making Alternative Treatment CHoices Intuitive and Trustworthy, MATCH-IT). DESIGN A combined randomised controlled trial and survey. Participants were presented with a clinical scenario and randomised to one of two versions of the MATCH-IT tool (A/B), instructed to explore the evidence and decide on a recommendation. Participants answered a questionnaire assessing interpretation, treatment recommendation self-assessed understandability and perceived usefulness before exposure to the other MATCH-IT version and asked questions on design preferences. SETTING Online lecture in an evidence-based medicine (EBM) introductory course. PARTICIPANTS 149 third-year medical students. 52% (n=77) had 6 months of clinical training and 48% (n=72) had preclinical training only. INTERVENTIONS The MATCH-IT tool version A uses colour coding to categorise interventions by magnitude and direction of effects and displays all outcomes in a table on entry. Version B has no colour coding, and the user must decide which outcomes to display in the table. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Interpretation of evidence, treatment recommendation, perceived usefulness and understandability, preference for format and design alternatives. RESULTS 82.5% (n=123) of medical students correctly answered ≥4 out of 5 multiple choice questions assessing interpretation of data. 75.8% (n=114) of students made a treatment recommendation in accordance with an expert panel for the same clinical scenario. 87.2% (n=130) found the tool understandable while 91.9% perceived the tool as useful in addressing the clinical scenario. CONCLUSION Medical students with no prior training in EBM can interpret and use the MATCH-IT tool. Certain design alternatives were preferred but had no bearing on interpretation of evidence or understandability of the tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Birk Stokke Hunskaar
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway
| | - Per Olav Løvsletten
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Medicine, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - Ashley Muller
- Norwegian Centre for Addiction Research, University of Oslo Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway
- Sørlandet sykehus HF Kristiansand, Kristiansand, Norway
| | - Per Olav Vandvik
- Institute of Health and Society, University of Oslo Faculty of Medicine, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Medicine, Lovisenberg Diakonale Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Busse JW, Casassus R, Carrasco-Labra A, Durham J, Mock D, Zakrzewska JM, Palmer C, Samer CF, Coen M, Guevremont B, Hoppe T, Guyatt GH, Crandon HN, Yao L, Sadeghirad B, Vandvik PO, Siemieniuk RAC, Lytvyn L, Hunskaar BS, Agoritsas T. Management of chronic pain associated with temporomandibular disorders: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ 2023; 383:e076227. [PMID: 38101929 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-076227] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
CLINICAL QUESTION What is the comparative effectiveness of available therapies for chronic pain associated with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)? CURRENT PRACTICE TMD are the second most common musculoskeletal chronic pain disorder after low back pain, affecting 6-9% of adults globally. TMD are associated with pain affecting the jaw and associated structures and may present with headaches, earache, clicking, popping, or crackling sounds in the temporomandibular joint, and impaired mandibular function. Current clinical practice guidelines are largely consensus-based and provide inconsistent recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS For patients living with chronic pain (≥3 months) associated with TMD, and compared with placebo or sham procedures, the guideline panel issued: (1) strong recommendations in favour of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) with or without biofeedback or relaxation therapy, therapist-assisted mobilisation, manual trigger point therapy, supervised postural exercise, supervised jaw exercise and stretching with or without manual trigger point therapy, and usual care (such as home exercises, stretching, reassurance, and education); (2) conditional recommendations in favour of manipulation, supervised jaw exercise with mobilisation, CBT with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), manipulation with postural exercise, and acupuncture; (3) conditional recommendations against reversible occlusal splints (alone or in combination with other interventions), arthrocentesis (alone or in combination with other interventions), cartilage supplement with or without hyaluronic acid injection, low level laser therapy (alone or in combination with other interventions), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, gabapentin, botulinum toxin injection, hyaluronic acid injection, relaxation therapy, trigger point injection, acetaminophen (with or without muscle relaxants or NSAIDS), topical capsaicin, biofeedback, corticosteroid injection (with or without NSAIDS), benzodiazepines, and β blockers; and (4) strong recommendations against irreversible oral splints, discectomy, and NSAIDS with opioids. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED An international guideline development panel including patients, clinicians with content expertise, and methodologists produced these recommendations in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines using the GRADE approach. The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. The panel approached the formulation of recommendations from the perspective of patients, rather than a population or health system perspective. THE EVIDENCE Recommendations are informed by a linked systematic review and network meta-analysis summarising the current body of evidence for benefits and harms of conservative, pharmacologic, and invasive interventions for chronic pain secondary to TMD. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION These recommendations apply to patients living with chronic pain (≥3 months duration) associated with TMD as a group of conditions, and do not apply to the management of acute TMD pain. When considering management options, clinicians and patients should first consider strongly recommended interventions, then those conditionally recommended in favour, then conditionally against. In doing so, shared decision making is essential to ensure patients make choices that reflect their values and preference, availability of interventions, and what they may have already tried. Further research is warranted and may alter recommendations in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jason W Busse
- Michael G DeGroote National Pain Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
- Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
| | - Rodrigo Casassus
- Orofacial Pain Unit, Maxillo-Facial Department, Clínica Alemana de Santiago, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
| | - Alonso Carrasco-Labra
- Center for Integrative Global Oral Health, University of Pennsylvania, School of Dental Medicine, Philadelphia PA, USA
| | | | - David Mock
- Faculty of Dentistry and Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Canada
| | - Joanna M Zakrzewska
- Royal National ENT &Eastman Dental Hospitals University College London Hospitals, London, UK
| | | | - Caroline F Samer
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Geneva University Hospitals
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Matteo Coen
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- Unit of Development and Research in Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Bruno Guevremont
- The Canadian Veterans Chronic Pain Centre of Excellence, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Thomas Hoppe
- The Canadian Veterans Chronic Pain Centre of Excellence, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Gordon H Guyatt
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
| | - Holly N Crandon
- Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Liang Yao
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
| | - Behnam Sadeghirad
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
- Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
| | - Per O Vandvik
- Department of Medicine, Innlandet Hospital Trust, Gjøvik, Norway
| | - Reed A C Siemieniuk
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
| | - Lyuba Lytvyn
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
| | | | - Thomas Agoritsas
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, Canada
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation, Oslo, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yao L, Sadeghirad B, Li M, Li J, Wang Q, Crandon HN, Martin G, Morgan R, Florez ID, Hunskaar BS, Wells J, Moradi S, Zhu Y, Ahmed MM, Gao Y, Cao L, Yang K, Tian J, Li J, Zhong L, Couban RJ, Guyatt GH, Agoritsas T, Busse JW. Management of chronic pain secondary to temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ 2023; 383:e076226. [PMID: 38101924 DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2023-076226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
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).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Liang Yao
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Behnam Sadeghirad
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Meixuan Li
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Health Technology Assessment Centre, Evidence Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Jing Li
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Health Technology Assessment Centre, Evidence Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Qi Wang
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Holly N Crandon
- Michael G. DeGroote Institute for Pain Research and Care, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Management and Innovation, University of Toronto, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
| | - Grace Martin
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rebecca Morgan
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Ivan D Florez
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia
- School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
- Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Clínica Las Americas, Medellin, Colombia
| | | | - Jeff Wells
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Sara Moradi
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Michael G. DeGroote National Pain Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ying Zhu
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Muhammad Muneeb Ahmed
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ya Gao
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Liujiao Cao
- West China School of Nursing/West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Kehu Yang
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
- Health Technology Assessment Centre, Evidence Based Social Science Research Center, School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Jinhui Tian
- Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China
| | - Jialing Li
- Department of Orthodontics, Nanjing Stomatological Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, China
| | - Linda Zhong
- School of Biological Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
| | - Rachel J Couban
- Michael G. DeGroote National Pain Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Gordon H Guyatt
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | - Thomas Agoritsas
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
- The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation, Oslo, Norway
| | - Jason W Busse
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- Department of Anesthesia, McMaster University, 1280 Main St. West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Michael G. DeGroote National Pain Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|