Assessing the order of magnitude of outcomes in single-arm cohorts through systematic comparison with corresponding cohorts: An example from the AMOS study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>When a therapy has been evaluated in the first clinical study, the outcome is often compared descriptively to outcomes in corresponding cohorts receiving other treatments. Such comparisons are often limited to selected studies, and often mix different outcomes and follow-up periods. Here we give an example of a systematic comparison to all cohorts with identical outcomes and follow-up periods.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The therapy to be compared (anthroposophic medicine, a complementary therapy system) had been evaluated in one single-arm cohort study: the Anthroposophic Medicine Outcomes Study (AMOS). The five largest AMOS diagnosis groups (A-cohorts: asthma, depression, low back pain, migraine, neck pain) were compared to all retrievable corresponding cohorts (C-cohorts) receiving other therapies with identical outcomes (SF-36 scales or summary measures) and identical follow-up periods (3, 6 or 12 months). Between-group differences (pre-post difference in an A-cohort minus pre-post difference in the respective C-cohort) were divided with the standard deviation (SD) of the baseline score of the A-cohort.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A-cohorts (5 cohorts with 392 patients) were similar to C-cohorts (84 cohorts with 16,167 patients) regarding age, disease duration, baseline affection and follow-up rates. A-cohorts had ≥ 0.50 SD larger improvements than C-cohorts in 13.5% (70/517) of comparisons; improvements of the same order of magnitude (small or minimal differences: -0.49 to 0.49 SD) were found in 80.1% of comparisons; and C-cohorts had ≥ 0.50 SD larger improvements than A-cohorts in 6.4% of comparisons. Analyses stratified by diagnosis had similar results. Sensitivity analyses, restricting the comparisons to C-cohorts with similar study design (observational studies), setting (primary care) or interventions (drugs, physical therapies, mixed), or restricting comparisons to SF-36 scales with small baseline differences between A- and C-cohorts (-0.49 to 0.49 SD) also had similar results.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In this descriptive analysis, anthroposophic therapy was associated with SF-36 improvements largely of the same order of magnitude as improvements following other treatments. Although these non-concurrent comparisons cannot assess comparative effectiveness, they suggest that improvements in health status following anthroposophic therapy can be clinically meaningful. The analysis also demonstrates the value of a systematic approach when comparing a therapy cohort to corresponding therapy cohorts.</p

Internet-based randomised controlled trials for the evaluation of complementary and alternative medicines: probiotics in spondyloarthropathy

&lt;b&gt;Background&lt;/b&gt; The clinical effectiveness of complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) is widely debated because of a lack of clinical trials. The internet may provide an effective and economical approach for undertaking randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of low-risk interventions. We investigated whether the internet could be used to perform an internet-based RCT of a CAM fulfilling the revised CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement quality checklist for reporting of RCTs. A secondary aim was to examine the effect of probiotics compared to placebo in terms of well-being over 12 weeks.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Methods&lt;/b&gt; People aged ≥18 years with confirmed spondyloarthropathy living in the United Kingdom with internet access were invited to participate in an internet-based RCT of probiotic compared to placebo for improving well-being and bowel symptoms. The intervention was a probiotic containing 4 strains of live bacteria or identical placebo taken by mouth daily for 3 months. The primary outcome measure was the performance of the trial according to the revised CONSORT statement.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Results&lt;/b&gt; 147 people were randomised into the trial. The internet-based trial of the CAM fulfilled the revised CONSORT statement such as efficient blinding, allocation concealment, intention to treat analysis and flow of participants through the trial. Recruitment of the required number of participants was completed in 19 months. Sixty-five percent (96/147) completed the entire 3 months of the trial. The trial was low cost and demonstrated that in an intention to treat analysis, probiotics did not improve well-being or bowel symptoms.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Conclusion&lt;/b&gt; The internet-based RCT proved to be a successful and economical method for examining this CAM intervention. Recruitment, adherence and completion rate were all similar to those reported with conventional RCTs but at a fraction of the cost. Internet-based RCTs can fulfil all the criteria of the revised CONSORT statement and are an appropriate method for studying low-risk interventions

The effect of TCM acupuncture on hot flushes among menopausal women (ACUFLASH) study: A study protocol of an ongoing multi-centre randomised controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND: After menopause, 10–20% of all women have nearly intolerable hot flushes. Long term use of hormone replacement therapy involves a health risk, and many women seek alternative strategies to relieve climacteric complaints. Acupuncture is one of the most frequently used complementary therapies in Norway. We designed a study to evaluate whether Traditional Chinese Medicine acupuncture-care together with self-care is more effective than self-care alone to relieve climacteric complaints. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a multi-centre pragmatic randomised controlled trial with two parallel arms. Participants are postmenopausal women who document ≥7 flushes/24 hours and who are not using hormone replacement therapy or other medication that may influence flushes. According to power calculations 200 women are needed to detect a 50% reduction in flushes, and altogether 286 women will be recruited to allow for a 30% dropout rate. The treatment group receives 10 sessions of Traditional Chinese Medicine acupuncture-care and self-care; the control group will engage in self-care only. A team of experienced Traditional Chinese Medicine acupuncturists give acupuncture treatments. DISCUSSION: The study tests acupuncture as a complete treatment package including the therapeutic relationship and expectation. The intervention period lasts for 12 weeks, with follow up at 6 and 12 months. Primary endpoint is change in daily hot flush frequency in the two groups from baseline to 12 weeks; secondary endpoint is health related quality of life, assessed by the Women's Health Questionnaire. We also collect data on Traditional Chinese Medicine diagnoses, and we examine treatment experiences using a qualitative approach. Finally we measure biological variables, to examine potential mechanisms for the effect of acupuncture. The study is funded by The Research Council of Norway

Any difference? Use of a CAM provider among cancer patients, coronary heart disease (CHD) patients and individuals with no cancer/CHD

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) among cancer patients has been described previously, prevalence of use has not commonly been compared to other disease groups in a true population sample where CAM use or cancer is not the main focus. The aims of the present study are to (1) examine how CAM use in cancer patients differs from people with a previous CHD diagnosis and people with no cancer or CHD diagnosis in an unselected general population and (2), investigate the use of a CAM provider among individuals with a previous cancer diagnosis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A total of 8040 men and women aged 29 to 87 in the city of Tromsø, Norway filled in a questionnaire developed specifically for the Tromsø V study with questions on life style and health issues. Visits to a CAM provider within the last 12 months and information on cancer, heart attack and angina pectoris (heart cramp) were among the questions. 1449 respondents were excluded from the analyses.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among the 6591 analysed respondents 331 had a prior cancer diagnosis, of whom 7.9% reported to have seen a CAM provider within the last 12 months. This did not differ significantly from neither the CHD group (6.4%, p = 0.402) nor the no cancer/CHD group (9.5%, p = 0.325).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>According to this study, the proportion of cancer patients seeing a CAM provider was not statistically significantly different from patients with CHD or individuals without cancer or CHD.</p

Management of primary chronic headache in the general population: the Akershus study of chronic headache

Primary chronic headaches cause more disability and necessitate high utilisation of health care. Our knowledge is based on selected populations, while information from the general population is largely lacking. An age and gender-stratified cross-sectional epidemiological survey included 30,000 persons aged 30–44 years. Respondents with self-reported chronic headache were interviewed by physicians. The International Classification of Headache Disorders was used. Of all primary chronic headache sufferers, 80% had consulted their general practitioner (GP), of these 19% had also consulted a neurologist and 4% had been hospitalised. Co-occurrence of migraine increased the probability of contact with a physician. A high Severity of Dependence Scale score increased the probability for contact with a physician. Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) was used by 62%, most often physiotherapy, acupuncture and chiropractic. Contact with a physician increased the probability of use of CAM. Acute headache medications were taken by 87%, while only 3% used prophylactic medication. GPs manage the majority of those with primary chronic headache, 1/5 never consults a physician for their headache, while approximately 1/5 is referred to a neurologist or hospitalised. Acute headache medication was frequently overused, while prophylactic medication was rarely used. Thus, avoidance of acute headache medication overuse and increased use of prophylactic medication may improve the management of primary chronic headaches in the future

Randomized controlled trials on treatment by homeopaths and self-treatment with homeopathic medicines: design and protocol

Background and objective: This study investigates (1) whether treatment by homeopaths is more efficacious than self-selected conventional health care and (2) whether self-treatment with self-selected homeopathic medicines is more efficacious than placebo in preventing childhood upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs).Design: A four-arm randomized controlled trial involving two independent investigations, one open and pragmatic (evaluating the effect of treatment by homeopaths including homeopathic medicines) and one doubleblinded (evaluating the effect of self-treatment with homeopathic medicine).Patients: The planned sample size is 420 children below the age of 10, recruited by a postal invitation to all children diagnosed with URTIs when attending a casualty department in Trondheim, Norway.Interventions: The children are randomly assigned to receive either (1) self-selected homeopathic medicine or placebo (270 patients), (2) treatment by one of four different homeopaths who could prescribe any homeopathic medicine (75 patients), or (3) waiting list control using self-selected conventional health care (75 patients).Main outcome measure: Total URTI symptom scores from patients' diary over 12 weeks.Plan: The results of these two studies (available at the end of 2004) have the potential to provide information about the efficacy of treatment by homeopaths independently from the efficacy of homeopathic medicines in children with URTIs

International development of traditional medicine / complementary and alternative medicine research - what can Europe learn?

The aim of this study was to analyse global research and development (R&amp;D) strategies for traditional medicine (TM) and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) across the world to learn from previous and on-going activities. Methods: 52 representatives within CAMbrella nominated 43 key international stakeholders (individuals and organisations) and 15 of these were prioritised. Information from policy documents including mission statements, R&amp;D strategies and R&amp;D activities were collected in combination with personal interviews. Data were analysed using the principles of content analysis. Results: Key stakeholders vary greatly in terms of capacity, mission and funding source (private/public). They ranged from only providing research funding to having a comprehensive R&amp;D and communication agenda. A common shift in R&amp;D strategy was noted; whereas 10 years ago research focused mainly on exploring efficacy and mechanisms, today the majority of stakeholders emphasise the importance of a broad spectrum of research, including methodologies exploring context, safety and comparative effectiveness. Conclusion: The scarce public investment in this field in Europe stands in stark contrast to the large investments found in Australia, Asia and North America. There is an emerging global trend supporting a broad research repertoire, including qualitative and comparative effectiveness research. This trend should be considered by the EU given the experience and the substantial research funding committed by the included stakeholders. To facilitate international collaborative efforts and minimise the risk of investment failure, we recommend the formation of a centralised EU CAM research centre fostering a broad CAM R&amp;D agenda with the responsibility for implementing the relevant findings of CAMbrella