Resource consumption and management associated with monitoring of warfarin treatment in primary health care in Sweden

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is used for the prevention and treatment of various thromboembolic complications. It is an efficacious anticoagulant, but it has a narrow therapeutic range, and regular monitoring is required to ensure therapeutic efficacy and at the same time avoid life-threatening adverse events. The objective was to assess management and resource consumption associated with patient monitoring episodes during warfarin treatment in primary health care in Sweden. METHODS: Delphi technique was used to systematically explore attitudes, demands and priorities, and to collect informed judgements related to monitoring of warfarin treatment. Two separate Delphi-panels were performed in three and two rounds, respectively, one concerning tests taken in primary health care centres, involving 34 GPs and 10 registered nurses, and one concerning tests taken in patients' homes, involving 49 district nurses. RESULTS: In the primary health care panel 10 of the 34 GPs regularly collaborated with a registered nurse. Average time for one monitoring episode was estimated to 10.1 minutes for a GP and 21.4 minutes for a nurse, when a nurse assisted a doctor. The average time for monitoring was 17.6 minutes for a GP when not assisted by a nurse. Considering all the monitoring episodes, 11.6% of patient blood samples were taken in the individual patient's home. Average time for such a monitoring episode was estimated to 88.2 minutes. Of all the visits, 8.2% were performed in vain and took on average 44.6 minutes. In both studies, approximately 20 different elements of work concerning management of patients during warfarin treatment were identified. CONCLUSION: Monitoring of patients during treatment with warfarin in primary health care in Sweden involves many elements of work, and demands large resources, especially when tests are taken in the patient's home

The risks and rewards of covariate adjustment in randomized trials: an assessment of 12 outcomes from 8 studies

Adjustment for prognostic covariates can lead to increased power in the analysis of randomized trials. However, adjusted analyses are not often performed in practice

Cluster over individual randomization: are study design choices appropriately justified? Review of a random sample of trials

Taljaard, M., Goldstein, C. E., Giraudeau, B., Nicholls, S. G., Carroll, K., Hey, S. P., … Weijer, C. (2020). Cluster over individual randomization: are study design choices appropriately justified? Review of a random sample of trials. Clinical Trials. Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/174077451989679

Reducing bias in open-label trials where blinded outcome assessment is not feasible: strategies from two randomised trials

Background Blinded outcome assessment is recommended in open-label trials to reduce bias, however it is not always feasible. It is therefore important to find other means of reducing bias in these scenarios. Methods We describe two randomised trials where blinded outcome assessment was not possible, and discuss the strategies used to reduce the possibility of bias. Results TRIGGER was an open-label cluster randomised trial whose primary outcome was further bleeding. Because of the cluster randomisation, all researchers in a hospital were aware of treatment allocation and so could not perform a blinded assessment. A blinded adjudication committee was also not feasible as it was impossible to compile relevant information to send to the committee in a blinded manner. Therefore, the definition of further bleeding was modified to exclude subjective aspects (such as whether symptoms like vomiting blood were severe enough to indicate the outcome had been met), leaving only objective aspects (the presence versus absence of active bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract confirmed by an internal examination). TAPPS was an open-label trial whose primary outcome was whether the patient was referred for a pleural drainage procedure. Allowing a blinded assessor to decide whether to refer the patient for a procedure was not feasible as many clinicians may be reluctant to enrol patients into the trial if they cannot be involved in their care during follow-up. Assessment by an adjudication committee was not possible, as the outcome either occurred or did not. Therefore, the decision pathway for procedure referral was modified. If a chest x-ray indicated that more than a third of the pleural space filled with fluid, the patient could be referred for a procedure; otherwise, the unblinded clinician was required to reach a consensus on referral with a blinded assessor. This process allowed the unblinded clinician to be involved in the patient’s care, while reducing the potential for bias. Conclusions When blinded outcome assessment is not possible, it may be useful to modify the outcome definition or method of assessment to reduce the risk of bias

The cost of monitoring warfarin in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation in primary care in Sweden

BACKGROUND: Warfarin is used for the prevention of stroke in chronic atrial fibrillation. The product has a narrow therapeutic index and to obtain treatment success, patients must be maintained within a given therapeutic range (International Normalised Ratio;INR). To ensure a wise allocation of health care resources, scrutiny of costs associated with various treatments is justified. The objective of this study was to estimate the health care cost of INR controls in patients on warfarin treatment with chronic atrial fibrillation in primary care in Sweden. METHODS: Data from various sources were applied in the analysis. Resource consumption was derived from two observational studies based on electronic patient records and two Delphi-panel studies performed in two and three rounds, respectively. Unit costs were taken from official databases and primary health care centres. RESULTS: The mean cost of one INR control was SEK 550. The mean costs of INR controls during the first three months, the first year and during the second year of treatment were SEK 6,811, SEK 16,244 and SEK 8,904 respectively. CONCLUSION: INR controls of patients on warfarin treatment in primary care in Sweden represent a substantial cost to the health care provider and they are particularly costly when undertaken in home care. The cost may however be off-set by the reduced incidence of stroke

Systematic Review of Outcome Measures Used in Observational Studies of Adults with Eosinophilic Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND Over the last 20 years, diverse outcome measures have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of therapies for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). This systematic review aims to identify the readouts used in observational studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation in adult EoE patients. METHODS We searched MEDLINE and Embase for prospective and retrospective studies (cohorts/case series, randomized open-label, and case-control) evaluating the use of diets, dilation, and topical corticosteroids in adults with EoE. Two authors independently assessed the articles and extracted information about histologic, endoscopic, and patient-reported outcomes and tools used to assess treatment effects. RESULTS We included 69 studies that met inclusion criteria. EoE-associated endoscopic findings (assessed either as absence/presence or using Endoscopic Reference Score) were evaluated in 24/35, 11/17, and 9/17 studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation, respectively. Esophageal eosinophil density was recorded in 32/35, 17/17, and 11/17 studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes were not uniformly used (only in 14, 8, and 3 studies of topical corticosteroids, diet, and dilation, respectively), and most tools were not validated for use in adults with EoE. CONCLUSIONS Despite the lack of an agreed set of core outcomes that should be recorded and reported in studies in adult EoE patients, endoscopic EoE-associated findings and esophageal eosinophil density are commonly used to assess disease activity in observational studies. Standardization of outcomes and data supporting the use of outcomes are needed to facilitate interpretation of evidence, its synthesis, and comparisons of interventions in meta-analyses of therapeutic trials in adults with EoE

Reducing bias in open-label trials where blinded outcome assessment is not feasible: strategies from two randomised trials

Abstract Background: Blinded outcome assessment is recommended in open-label trials to reduce bias, however it is not always feasible. It is therefore important to find other means of reducing bias in these scenarios. Methods: We describe two randomised trials where blinded outcome assessment was not possible, and discuss the strategies used to reduce the possibility of bias. Results: TRIGGER was an open-label cluster randomised trial whose primary outcome was further bleeding. Because of the cluster randomisation, all researchers in a hospital were aware of treatment allocation and so could not perform a blinded assessment. A blinded adjudication committee was also not feasible as it was impossible to compile relevant information to send to the committee in a blinded manner. Therefore, the definition of further bleeding was modified to exclude subjective aspects (such as whether symptoms like vomiting blood were severe enough to indicate the outcome had been met), leaving only objective aspects (the presence versus absence of active bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract confirmed by an internal examination). TAPPS was an open-label trial whose primary outcome was whether the patient was referred for a pleural drainage procedure. Allowing a blinded assessor to decide whether to refer the patient for a procedure was not feasible as many clinicians may be reluctant to enrol patients into the trial if they cannot be involved in their care during follow-up. Assessment by an adjudication committee was not possible, as the outcome either occurred or did not. Therefore, the decision pathway for procedure referral was modified. If a chest x-ray indicated that more than a third of the pleural space filled with fluid, the patient could be referred for a procedure; otherwise, the unblinded clinician was required to reach a consensus on referral with a blinded assessor. This process allowed the unblinded clinician to be involved in the patient's care, while reducing the potential for bias. Conclusions: When blinded outcome assessment is not possible, it may be useful to modify the outcome definition or method of assessment to reduce the risk of bias

Standardisation of intestinal ultrasound scoring in clinical trials for luminal Crohn's disease

Background: Intestinal ultrasound (IUS) is a valuable tool for assessment of Crohn’s disease (CD). However, there is no widely accepted luminal disease activity index. / Aims: To identify appropriate IUS protocols, indices, items, and scoring methods for measurement of luminal CD activity and integration of IUS in CD clinical trials. / Methods: An expert international panel of adult and paediatric gastroenterologists (n = 15) and radiologists (n = 3) rated the appropriateness of 120 statements derived from literature review and expert opinion (scale of 1-9) using modified RAND/UCLA methodology. Median panel scores of 1 to ≤3.5, >3.5 to <6.5 and ≥6.5 to 9 were considered inappropriate, uncertain and appropriate ratings respectively. The statement list and survey results were discussed prior to voting. / Results: A total of 91 statements were rated appropriate with agreement after two rounds of voting. Items considered appropriate measures of disease activity were bowel wall thickness (BWT), vascularity, stratification and mesenteric inflammatory fat. There was uncertainty if any of the existing IUS disease activity indices were appropriate for use in CD clinical trials. Appropriate trial applications for IUS included patient recruitment qualification when diseased segments cannot be adequately assessed by ileocolonoscopy and screening for exclusionary complications. At outcome assessment, remission endpoints including BWT and vascularity, with or without mesenteric inflammatory fat, were considered appropriate. Components of an ideal IUS disease activity index were identified based upon panel discussions. / Conclusions: The panel identified appropriate component items and applications of IUS for CD clinical trials. Empiric evidence, and development and validation of an IUS disease activity index are needed

Gianturco Z-stent placement for the treatment of chronic central venous occlusive disease: implantation of 208 stents in 137 symptomatic patients

PURPOSETo report the technical successes, adverse events, and long-term stent patency rates of Gianturco Z-stents for management of chronic central venous occlusive disease.METHODSOverall, 137 patients, with mean age 48.6±16.1 years (range, 16-89 years), underwent placement of Gianturco Z-stents for chronic central venous occlusions. Presenting symptoms included lower extremity edema (n=66, 48.2%), superior vena cava syndrome (n=30, 21.9%), unilateral upper extremity swelling (n=20, 14.6%), hemodialysis fistula or catheter dysfunction (n=11, 8.0%), ascites (n=8, 5.8%), and both ascites and lower extremity edema (n=2, 1.5%). Most common etiologies of central venous occlusion were prior central venous access placement (n=58, 42.3%), extrinsic compression (n=29, 21.2%), and post-surgical anastomotic stenosis (n=27, 19.7%). Number of stents placed, stent implantation location, stent sizes, technical successes, adverse events, need for re-intervention, follow-up evaluation, stent patencies, and mortality were recorded. Technical success was defined as recanalization and stent reconstruction with restoration of in-line venous flow. Adverse events were defined by the Society of Interventional Radiology Adverse Event Classification criteria. Primary and primary-assisted stent patencies were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.RESULTSIn total, 208 Z-stents were placed. The three most common placement sites were the inferior vena cava (n=124, 59.6%), superior vena cava (n=44, 21.2%), and brachiocephalic veins (n=27, 13.0%). Technical success was achieved in 133 patients (97.1%). There were two (1.5%) severe adverse events (two cases of stent migration to the right atrium), one (0.7%) moderate adverse event, and one (0.7%) mild adverse event. Mean follow-up was 43.6±52.7 months. Estimated 1-, 3-, and 5-year primary stent patency was 84.2%, 84.2%, and 82.1%, respectively. Estimated 1-, 3-, and 5-year primary-assisted patency was 92.3%, 89.6%, and 89.6%, respectively. The 30- and 60- day mortality rates were 2.9% (n=4) and 5.1% (n=7), none of which were directly attributable to Z-stent placement.CONCLUSIONGianturco Z-stent placement is safe and effective for the treatment for chronic central venous occlusive disease with durable short- and long-term patencies

Narrow-band Imaging for Detection of Neoplasia at Colonoscopy: a Meta-analysis of Data From Individual Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials

Background & Aims Adenoma detection rate (ADR) is an important quality assurance measure for colonoscopy. Some studies suggest that narrow band imaging (NBI) may be more effective at detection of adenomas than white-light endoscopy (WLE) when bowel preparation is optimal. We conducted a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of NBI to WLE in detection of adenomas. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases, through April 2017, for randomized controlled trials that assessed detection of colon polyps by high-definition WLE vs NBI and from which data on individual patients was available. The primary outcome measure was ADR adjusted for bowel preparation quality. Multilevel regression models were used with patients nested within trials, and trial included as a random effect. Results We collected data from 11 trials, comprising 4491 patients and 6636 polyps detected. Adenomas were detected in 952/2251 (42.3%) participants examined by WLE vs 1011/2239 (45.2%) participants examined by NBI (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] for detection of adenoma by WLE vs NBI, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01–1.29; P=.04). NBI outperformed WLE only when bowel preparation was best: adequate preparation OR, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.92–1.24; P=.38) vs best preparation OR, 1.30 (95% CI, 1.04–1.62; P=.02). Second-generation bright NBI had a better ADR than WLE (second-generation NBI OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.05–1.56; P=.02), whereas first-generation NBI did not. NBI detected more non-adenomatous polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06–1.44; P=.008) and flat polyps than WLE (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02–1.51; P=.03). Conclusions In a meta-analysis of data from individual patients in randomized controlled trials, we found NBI to have a higher ADR than WLE, and that this effect is greater when bowel preparation is optimal