首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The British Journal of General Practice >What influences participants treatment preference and can it influence outcome? Results from a primary care-based randomised trial for shoulder pain.
【2h】

What influences participants treatment preference and can it influence outcome? Results from a primary care-based randomised trial for shoulder pain.

机译:什么会影响参与者的治疗偏爱并且会影响结果?一项基于初级保健的肩膀疼痛随机试验的结果。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BACKGROUND: In randomised clinical trials (RCTs), outcome may be influenced by the opinions of the participants about the efficacy of treatments. AIM: To examine how initial treatment preferences of participants in a shoulder pain trial affected functional outcome and future treatment preferences. DESIGN OF STUDY: Observational cohort study nested within a multicentre, pragmatic RCT of steroid injection versus physiotherapy for unilateral shoulder pain. SETTING: Nine general practices in north Staffordshire. METHOD: Two hundred and seven adults were randomised in the trial. Disability scores and preferences of the participants for the trial treatments were elicited at two points: prior to randomisation and 6 months post-randomisation. A good functional outcome was defined as at least a halving in the disability score at the 6 months follow-up point. RESULTS: Pre-randomisation preferences were: 40% for injection and 20% for physiotherapy, and 40% gave no preference. A good outcome was achieved in a higher percentage of participants who gave a pre-randomisation treatment preference compared with those who did not (62% compared with 48% percentage difference = 14%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1 to 27%) with similar percentages in each preferred treatment group. However, receiving the preferred treatment did not confer any additional benefit in those who expressed a preference (receiving preferred treatment = 56%; not receiving preferred treatment = 69%). At 6 months post-randomisation, participants with a good, as opposed to poor, outcome were more likely to report as their preferred treatment the one to which they had been randomised, irrespective of pre-randomisation preference and whether the preferred treatment was received. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that preferences prior to treatment can affect outcome, but that treatment outcome is a stronger influence on post-treatment preferences. We present some empirical evidence to support the statement that treatment preferences can have important effects on the results of RCTs.
机译:背景:在随机临床试验(RCT)中,结果可能会受参与者对治疗效果的意见的影响。目的:研究肩痛试验参与者的初始治疗偏好如何影响功能结局和未来治疗偏好。研究设计:观察性队列研究嵌套在多中心,实用的类固醇激素注射与物理疗法相结合的单侧肩部疼痛研究中。地点:北斯塔福德郡的九种常规做法。方法:将207名成人随机分为试验对象。在两个点上得出参与者的残疾评分和他们对试验治疗的偏好:随机化之前和随机化之后六个月。良好的功能预后被定义为在6个月的随访中残疾评分至少减半。结果:随机化前的偏好是:注射为40%,理疗为20%,而40%没有。与未进行随机化治疗的患者相比,进行随机化前治疗的患者有较高的百分比(62%,相比48%的百分比差异为14%; 95%的置信区间[CI] = -1至27) %)在每个首选治疗组中的百分比相似。但是,在那些表示偏爱的患者中(接受偏爱的治疗= 56%;未接受偏爱的治疗= 69%),接受偏爱的治疗不会带来任何额外的好处。随机分配后6个月,结果好(而不是差)的参与者更有可能报告他们已被随机分组​​的首选治疗方法,而不考虑随机化前的偏好和是否接受了首选治疗。结论:该分析表明,治疗前的偏好会影响预后,但治疗结果对治疗后的偏好有更强的影响。我们提供一些经验证据来支持治疗偏爱可能对RCTs结果产生重要影响的说法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号