...
首页> 外文期刊>The British journal of general practice: the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners >How usual is usual care in pragmatic intervention studies in primary care? An overview of recent trials.
【24h】

How usual is usual care in pragmatic intervention studies in primary care? An overview of recent trials.

机译:在初级保健中进行实用干预研究时,通常的护理情况如何?最近的试验概述。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Because pragmatic trials are performed to determine if an intervention can improve current practice, they often have a control group receiving 'usual care'. The behaviour of caregivers and patients in this control group should be influenced by the actions of researchers as little as possible. Guidelines for describing the composition and management of a usual care control group are lacking. AIM: To explore the variety of approaches to the usual care concept in pragmatic trials, and evaluate the influence of the study design on the behaviour of caregivers and patients in a usual care control group. DESIGN OF STUDY: Review of 73 pragmatic trials in primary care with a usual care control group published between January 2005 and December 2009 in the British Medical Journal, the British Journal of General Practice, and Family Practice. Outcome measures were: description of the factors influencing caregiver and patients in a usual care control group related to an individual randomised design versus cluster randomisation. RESULTS: In total, 38 individually randomised trials and 35 cluster randomised trials were included. In most trials, caregivers had the freedom to treat control patients according to their own insight; in two studies, treatment options were restricted. Although possible influences on the behaviour of control caregivers and control patients were more often identified in individually randomised trials, these influences were also present in cluster randomised trials. The description of instructions and information provided to the control group was often insufficient, which made evaluation of the trials difficult. CONCLUSION: Researchers in primary care medicine should carefully consider the design of a usual care control group, especially with regard to minimising the risk of study-induced behavioural change. It is recommended that an adequate description of the information is provided to control caregivers and control patients. A proposal is made for an extension to the CONSORT statement that requires authors to specify details of the usual care control group.
机译:背景:由于进行了务实的试验来确定一种干预措施是否可以改善当前的实践,因此他们通常会有一个接受“常规护理”的对照组。对照组中看护者和患者的行为应尽可能少地受到研究者行为的影响。缺乏描述常规护理对照组的组成和管理的指南。目的:探讨实用试验中采用常规护理概念的各种方法,并评估研究设计对常规护理对照组中护理人员和患者行为的影响。研究设计:2005年1月至2009年12月在英国医学杂志,英国一般实践和家庭实践杂志上发表的73项初级保健实践研究与一个常规护理对照组进行了回顾。结果指标为:描述影响照护者和常规护理对照组患者的因素,这些因素与个体随机设计和聚类随机化有关。结果:总共包括38项独立随机试验和35项整群随机试验。在大多数试验中,看护者可以根据自己的见解自由治疗对照患者。在两项研究中,治疗选择受到限制。尽管在个体随机试验中更经常地确定了对对照照料者和对照患者行为的可能影响,但在整群随机试验中也存在这些影响。提供给对照组的说明和信息的描述通常不够充分,这使得难以评估试验。结论:初级保健医学的研究人员应仔细考虑常规护理对照组的设计,尤其是在最大程度地降低研究引起的行为改变的风险方面。建议提供足够的信息描述,以控制护理人员和控制患者。建议对CONSORT声明进行扩展,要求作者指定常规护理对照组的详细信息。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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