Lecture Evidence based medicine: Effectiveness of therapy

30 33 0
Lecture Evidence based medicine: Effectiveness of therapy

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống

Thông tin tài liệu

This lecture includes these contents: Effectiveness of therapy, critically appraising a therapy paper, efficacy versus effectiveness, observation versus experimental studies,... Invite you to consult this lecture.

EVIDENCE BASED  MEDICINE Effectiveness of therapy Ross Lawrenson Critically appraising a therapy  paper Critical Appraisal of a therapy  paper ­ methodology • When critically appraising a paper  ask yourself three questions: – Are the results valid? – What are the results? – Will the results help me in caring for  my patients? • Go to the therapy worksheet for the  complete list of questions I. Are the results valid? • In other words was this a well designed  study in a relevant population. The best  study design to answer a therapy question  is a randomised controlled trial.  • Go through the worksheet questions 1­ 6 to  help you decide whether you are likely to  believe the results of the paper you are  considering 1. Did the study address a clearly  focused question? • Can you define – The population they studied – The intervention – The comparison group – The outcomes 2. Was the assignment of patients  randomised? Efficacy versus effectiveness Efficacy versus effectiveness • Efficacy ­ does receiving treatment  work under ideal conditions? Efficacy versus effectiveness • Efficacy ­ does receiving treatment  work under ideal conditions? • Effectiveness ­ does offering treatment  help under ordinary circumstances? Observation versus  experimental studies Relative risk • Relative risk  (RR) is the absolute risk  in the treated group divided by the  absolute risk in the untreated group (or  vice versa) Randomised controlled trials • Because the randomised trial removes selection  bias the result of the study should be believed  over the evidence from the observational study  i.e. the Relative risk is 1 (no difference in  treatment) not 0.6 (which suggested a benefit  from treatment.) •  An example of this would be the use of HRT  and the reduction in cardiovascular risk.  Observational studies have shown a 50%  reduction in CHD but the RCT showed no  benefit. (References) 3. Were all patients who entered  the trial properly accounted for  and attributed at its conclusion? (a) Was the follow up complete? ­  selection bias (b) Were the patients analysed in the  groups to which they were  randomised? ­ intention to treat  analysis          Selection bias Randomised controlled trials Sample Population Treatment 1 Outcomes Treatment 2  Outcomes (a) Selection of study population sample (Should be representative of the general population  to ensure external validity) sample trial  population unsuitable  (excluded) sample trial population unsuitable (excluded) intervention trial completed adverse events/lost to follow up = Possible bias sample trial population unsuitable (excluded) intervention trial completed adverse events/lost to follow up Sources of selection bias Non random sample is selected.  e.g. Volunteers. Healthy worker.  Hospital patients Sources of selection bias Non random sample is selected.  e.g. Volunteers. Healthy worker.  Hospital patients Unsuitable patients excluded Sources of selection bias Non random sample is selected.  Volunteers. Healthy worker.  Hospital patients Unsuitable patients excluded Hard to trace people are omitted Sources of selection bias Non random sample is selected.  Volunteers. Healthy worker.  Hospital patients Unsuitable patients excluded Hard to trace people are omitted Large number of refusals in the  selected population Sources of selection bias Non random sample is selected.  Volunteers. Healthy worker.  Hospital patients Unsuitable patients excluded Hard to trace people are omitted Large number of refusals in the  selected population Large number of people dropping  out of the study or lost to follow up (b) Intention to treat analysis ... 2. Was the assignment of patients  randomised? Efficacy versus effectiveness Efficacy versus effectiveness • Efficacy ­ does receiving treatment  work under ideal conditions? Efficacy versus effectiveness. .. Go to the therapy worksheet for the  complete list of questions I. Are the results valid? • In other words was this a well designed  study in a relevant population. The best  study design to answer a therapy question ...Critically appraising a therapy paper Critical Appraisal of a therapy paper ­ methodology • When critically appraising a paper  ask yourself three questions:

Ngày đăng: 23/01/2020, 12:45

Mục lục

  • EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE

  • Critically appraising a therapy paper

  • Critical Appraisal of a therapy paper - methodology

  • I. Are the results valid?

  • 1. Did the study address a clearly focused question?

  • 2. Was the assignment of patients randomised?

  • Efficacy versus effectiveness

  • Slide 8

  • Slide 9

  • Observation versus experimental studies.

  • Observation versus experimental studies

  • Slide 12

  • Slide 13

  • Slide 14

  • Absolute risk

  • Relative risk

  • Randomised controlled trials

  • 3. Were all patients who entered the trial properly accounted for and attributed at its conclusion?

  • Slide 19

  • Slide 20

Tài liệu cùng người dùng

Tài liệu liên quan