Interventions for behaviour change and self-management in stroke secondary prevention: protocol for an overview of reviews

Abstract Background Stroke secondary prevention guidelines recommend medication prescription and adherence, active education and behavioural counselling regarding lifestyle risk factors. To impact on recurrent vascular events, positive behaviour/s must be adopted and sustained as a lifestyle choice, requiring theoretically informed behaviour change and self-management interventions. A growing number of systematic reviews have addressed complex interventions in stroke secondary prevention. Differing terminology, inclusion criteria and overlap of studies between reviews makes the mechanism/s that affect positive change difficult to identify or replicate clinically. Adopting a two-phase approach, this overview will firstly comprehensively summarise systematic reviews in this area and secondly identify and synthesise primary studies in these reviews which provide person-centred, theoretically informed interventions for stroke secondary prevention. Methods An overview of reviews will be conducted using a systematic search strategy across the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed and Epistomonikas. Inclusion criteria: systematic reviews where the population comprises individuals post-stroke or TIA and where data relating to person-centred risk reduction are synthesised for evidence of efficacy when compared to standard care or no intervention. Primary outcomes of interest include mortality, recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular events. In phase 1, two reviewers will independently (1) assess the eligibility of identified reviews for inclusion; (2) rate the quality of included reviews using the ROBIS tool; (3) identify unique primary studies and overlap between reviews; (4) summarise the published evidence supporting person-centred behavioural change and self-management interventions in stroke secondary prevention and (5) identify evidence gaps in this field. In phase 2, two independent reviewers will (1) examine person-centred, primary studies in each review using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR checklist), itemising, where present, theoretical frameworks underpinning interventions; (2) group studies employing theoretically informed interventions by the intervention delivered and by the outcomes reported (3) apply GRADE quality of evidence for each intervention by outcome/s identified from theoretically informed primary studies. Disagreement between reviewers at each process stage will be discussed and a third reviewer consulted. Discussion This overview will comprehensively bring together the best available evidence supporting person-centred, stroke secondary prevention strategies in an accessible format, identifying current knowledge gaps

Professionalism, golf coaching and a master of science degree

A distinction can be made between 'professionalisation', which is concerned with occupational status and standing, and 'professionalism,' which refers to matters of quality and standards of practice (especially specialized knowledge, ethics and altruism). The purpose of this stimulus article is to present key features of contemporary medical professionalism as a basis for critically reflecting on discourse associated with Tiger Woods' current coach, Sean Foley. It is suggested that that provision of a Master of Science degree in golf teaching/coaching would facilitate the development of 'professionalism' in golf coaches

Impact of quality of evidence on the strength of recommendations: an empirical study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Evidence is necessary but not sufficient for decision-making, such as making recommendations by clinical practice guideline panels. However, the fundamental premise of evidence-based medicine (EBM) rests on the assumed link between the quality of evidence and "truth" and/or correctness in making guideline recommendations. If this assumption is accurate, then the quality of evidence ought to play a key role in making guideline recommendations. Surprisingly, and despite the widespread penetration of EBM in health care, there has been no empirical research to date investigating the impact of quality of evidence on the strength of recommendations made by guidelines panels.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The American Association of Blood Banking (AABB) has recently convened a 12 member panel to develop clinical practice guidelines (CPG) for the use of fresh-frozen plasma (FFP) for 6 different clinical indications. The panel was instructed that 4 factors should play a role in making recommendation: quality of evidence, uncertainty about the balance between desirable (benefits) and undesirable effects (harms), uncertainty or variability in values and preferences, and uncertainty about whether the intervention represents a wise use of resources (costs). Each member of the panel was asked to make his/her final judgments on the strength of recommendation and the overall quality of the body of evidence. "Voting" was anonymous and was based on the use of GRADE (Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations) system, which clearly distinguishes between quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Despite the fact that many factors play role in formulating CPG recommendations, we show that when the quality of evidence is higher, the probability of making a strong recommendation for or against an intervention dramatically increases. Probability of making strong recommendation was 62% when evidence is "moderate", while it was only 23% and 13% when evidence was "low" or "very low", respectively.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We report the first empirical evaluation of the relationship between quality of evidence pertinent to a clinical question and strength of the corresponding guideline recommendations. Understanding the relationship between quality of evidence and probability of making (strong) recommendation has profound implications for the science of quality measurement in health care.</p

Estimating the number needed to treat from continuous outcomes in randomised controlled trials: methodological challenges and worked example using data from the UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (BEAM) trial

Background Reporting numbers needed to treat (NNT) improves interpretability of trial results. It is unusual that continuous outcomes are converted to numbers of individual responders to treatment (i.e., those who reach a particular threshold of change); and deteriorations prevented are only rarely considered. We consider how numbers needed to treat can be derived from continuous outcomes; illustrated with a worked example showing the methods and challenges. Methods We used data from the UK BEAM trial (n = 1, 334) of physical treatments for back pain; originally reported as showing, at best, small to moderate benefits. Participants were randomised to receive 'best care' in general practice, the comparator treatment, or one of three manual and/or exercise treatments: 'best care' plus manipulation, exercise, or manipulation followed by exercise. We used established consensus thresholds for improvement in Roland-Morris disability questionnaire scores at three and twelve months to derive NNTs for improvements and for benefits (improvements gained+deteriorations prevented). Results At three months, NNT estimates ranged from 5.1 (95% CI 3.4 to 10.7) to 9.0 (5.0 to 45.5) for exercise, 5.0 (3.4 to 9.8) to 5.4 (3.8 to 9.9) for manipulation, and 3.3 (2.5 to 4.9) to 4.8 (3.5 to 7.8) for manipulation followed by exercise. Corresponding between-group mean differences in the Roland-Morris disability questionnaire were 1.6 (0.8 to 2.3), 1.4 (0.6 to 2.1), and 1.9 (1.2 to 2.6) points. Conclusion In contrast to small mean differences originally reported, NNTs were small and could be attractive to clinicians, patients, and purchasers. NNTs can aid the interpretation of results of trials using continuous outcomes. Where possible, these should be reported alongside mean differences. Challenges remain in calculating NNTs for some continuous outcomes

Progression of Symptoms and Functioning Among Female Cardiac Patients With and Without Diabetes

Objective: To determine if older women with both heart disease and diabetes experience worse physical and psychosocial functioning and higher symptom burden over an 18-month period compared with those with heart disease alone. Methods: Data from older women with heart disease (>=60 years, n = 1008, 18% with diabetes) were used to assess the impact of diabetes on physical functioning (Sickness Impact Profile [SIP]-Physical and Six-Minute Walk test [6MWT]), psychosocial functioning (SIP-Psychosocial and depressive symptoms), and physical symptom burden (cardiac and general) at baseline and 4, 12, and 18 months later. Generalized estimating equation models compared trends in outcomes over time between groups with and without diabetes. Results: Across all four time points, women with heart disease and diabetes had greater functional impairment, as indicated by higher SIP scores, than those without diabetes (43%-71% higher SIP-Physical scores and 32%-65% higher SIP-Pyschosocial scores; all p<=-0.002). 6MWT distance was 17%-30% less in the diabetes group across time points (all p<=-0.002). Depressive symptoms were 27%-39% higher in the diabetes group (all p-<-0.03) except at month 4. Women with diabetes scored 15%-29% higher on a physical symptom index across time points (all p-<-0.05) than those without diabetes; no significant differences were observed in cardiac symptoms until month 18 (diabetes group 29% higher, p = 0.02). Subgroups with and without diabetes in this sample experienced significantly different trends over time in SIP-Physical scores (p = 0.02) and 6MWT distance (p = 0.05), such that the disadvantage of the diabetes group at baseline was greater 18 months later. Conclusions: Women with comorbid diabetes and heart disease are vulnerable to poor health-related quality of life, particularly in terms of physical functioning and symptoms, and require special efforts from clinical care providers to ameliorate a potential downward trend in these outcomes over time.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90452/1/jwh-2E2010-2E2123.pd

Evidence-based Urology:Understanding Heterogeneity in Systematic Reviews

Variability in the results of randomized trials presents challenges to the interpretation and application of the evidence to patient care. Understanding how systematic reviews deal with this problem of "heterogeneity" will help clinicians in applying results in their patient management. This manuscript offers a review of heterogeneity from the clinical urological perspective.  PATIENT SUMMARY: Systematic reviews of the literature are necessary to accurately summarize the available evidence to inform clinical decisions. In this mini-review, we explain how to understand and deal with the differences between studies-which we call heterogeneity-included in these types of reviews

The Number of Patients and Events Required to Limit the Risk of Overestimation of Intervention Effects in Meta-Analysis—A Simulation Study

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses including a limited number of patients and events are prone to yield overestimated intervention effect estimates. While many assume bias is the cause of overestimation, theoretical considerations suggest that random error may be an equal or more frequent cause. The independent impact of random error on meta-analyzed intervention effects has not previously been explored. It has been suggested that surpassing the optimal information size (i.e., the required meta-analysis sample size) provides sufficient protection against overestimation due to random error, but this claim has not yet been validated. METHODS: We simulated a comprehensive array of meta-analysis scenarios where no intervention effect existed (i.e., relative risk reduction (RRR) = 0%) or where a small but possibly unimportant effect existed (RRR = 10%). We constructed different scenarios by varying the control group risk, the degree of heterogeneity, and the distribution of trial sample sizes. For each scenario, we calculated the probability of observing overestimates of RRR>20% and RRR>30% for each cumulative 500 patients and 50 events. We calculated the cumulative number of patients and events required to reduce the probability of overestimation of intervention effect to 10%, 5%, and 1%. We calculated the optimal information size for each of the simulated scenarios and explored whether meta-analyses that surpassed their optimal information size had sufficient protection against overestimation of intervention effects due to random error. RESULTS: The risk of overestimation of intervention effects was usually high when the number of patients and events was small and this risk decreased exponentially over time as the number of patients and events increased. The number of patients and events required to limit the risk of overestimation depended considerably on the underlying simulation settings. Surpassing the optimal information size generally provided sufficient protection against overestimation. CONCLUSIONS: Random errors are a frequent cause of overestimation of intervention effects in meta-analyses. Surpassing the optimal information size will provide sufficient protection against overestimation

Development and validation of the ACE tool: Assessing medical trainees' competency in evidence based medicine

BACKGROUND: While a variety of instruments have been developed to assess knowledge and skills in evidence based medicine (EBM), few assess all aspects of EBM - including knowledge, skills attitudes and behaviour - or have been psychometrically evaluated. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an instrument that evaluates medical trainees’ competency in EBM across knowledge, skills and attitude. METHODS: The ‘Assessing Competency in EBM’ (ACE) tool was developed by the authors, with content and face validity assessed by expert opinion. A cross-sectional sample of 342 medical trainees representing ‘novice’, ‘intermediate’ and ‘advanced’ EBM trainees were recruited to complete the ACE tool. Construct validity, item difficulty, internal reliability and item discrimination were analysed. RESULTS: We recruited 98 EBM-novice, 108 EBM-intermediate and 136 EBM-advanced participants. A statistically significant difference in the total ACE score was observed and corresponded to the level of training: on a 0-15-point test, the mean ACE scores were 8.6 for EBM-novice; 9.5 for EBM-intermediate; and 10.4 for EBM-advanced (p < 0.0001). Individual item discrimination was excellent (Item Discrimination Index ranging from 0.37 to 0.84), with internal reliability consistent across all but three items (Item Total Correlations were all positive ranging from 0.14 to 0.20). CONCLUSION: The 15-item ACE tool is a reliable and valid instrument to assess medical trainees’ competency in EBM. The ACE tool provides a novel assessment that measures user performance across the four main steps of EBM. To provide a complete suite of instruments to assess EBM competency across various patient scenarios, future refinement of the ACE instrument should include further scenarios across harm, diagnosis and prognosis

Wound irrigation does not affect healthrelated quality of life after open fractures: Results of a randomized controlled trial

© 2018 Sprague et al. Aims The Fluid Lavage in Open Fracture Wounds (FLOW) trial was a multicentre, blinded, randomized controlled trial that used a 2 3 factorial design to evaluate the effect of irrigation solution (soap versus normal saline) and irrigation pressure (very low versus low versus high) on health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with open fractures. In this study, we used this dataset to ascertain whether these factors affect whether HRQL returns to pre-injury levels at 12-months post-injury. Patients and Methods Participants completed the Short Form-12 (SF-12) and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) at baseline (pre-injury recall), at two and six weeks, and at three, six, nine and 12-months postfracture. We calculated the Physical Component Score (PCS) and the Mental Component Score (MCS) of the SF-12 and the EQ-5D utility score, conducted an analysis using a multilevel generalized linear model, and compared differences between the baseline and 12- month scores. Results We found no clinically important differences between irrigating solutions or pressures for the SF-12 PCS, SF-12 MCS and EQ-5D. Irrespective of treatment, participants had not returned to their pre-injury function at 12-months for any of the three outcomes (p \u3c 0.001). Conclusion Neither the composition of the irrigation solution nor irrigation pressure applied had an effect on HRQL. Irrespective of treatment, patients had not returned to their pre-injury HRQL at 12 months post-fracture