Outcome inconsistency in randomized controlled trials for pneumonia could create issues for interpreting data and compiling research going forward, said Alexander Mathioudakis, MD, MRCP, at the European Respiratory Society annual meeting.
Outcome inconsistency in randomized controlled trials for pneumonia could create issues for interpreting data and compiling research in meta-analyses going forward, said Alexander Mathioudakis, MD, MRCP, a clinical research fellow and honorary lecturer in respiratory medicine at the University of Manchester and Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust.
Transcript:
How do randomized controlled trials reporting on pneumonia outcomes differ from each other and which outcomes measurements are the most commonly reported?
Mathioudakis: We have looked into the outcomes reported in trials assessing the management of community acquired pneumonia, hospital acquired pneumonia, and ventilator associated pneumonia in a systematic review that is presented in the ERS 2021 International Congress. We looked at 174 ongoing or completed randomized controlled trials, which were conducted during the last decade. And we looked at about 1400 outcomes from all these trials. More specifically, we found 72 trials looking into community acquired pneumonia predominantly, and 98 trials that looked at ventilator associated pneumonia with or without the hospital acquired pneumonia as well.
Now, in all these trials, we saw that they evaluated very diverse outcomes. And that's a big problem for a few reasons. The main reason is that many trials do not assess the outcomes that are most important to patients and other stakeholders and doctors, of course, and that makes it very difficult to interpret and use in clinical practice. And the other problem is that they are not comparable. So, it's challenging for systematic reviews and meta analyses to merge their results. And it is also very challenging for clinical practice guideline developers to develop recommendations that are strong and based on high quality evidence.
Now, the outcomes that were most frequently reported in both types of trials were mortality, treatment success or failure, and adverse events. I have to say, apart from adverse events in the community acquired pneumonia trials, which were reported in about 3 quarters of the trials, all other outcomes were not reported frequently or consistently in our studies.
Dr Kathy Zackowski Discusses the Importance of Rehabilitation Research and Trials in MS
April 26th 2024Kathy Zackowski, PhD, National MS Society, expresses the inherent value of quality rehabilitation trials for broadening clinical understandings of multiple sclerosis (MS) and bettering patient outcomes.
Read More
Examining Low-Value Cancer Care Trends Amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic
April 25th 2024On this episode of Managed Care Cast, we're talking with the authors of a study published in the April 2024 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care® about their findings on the rates of low-value cancer care services throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Listen
Empowering Community Health Through Wellness and Faith
April 23rd 2024To help celebrate and recognize National Minority Health Month, we are bringing you a special month-long podcast series with our Strategic Alliance Partner, UPMC Health Plan. In the third episode, Camille Clarke-Smith, EdD, MS, CHES, CPT, discusses approaching community health holistically through spiritual and community engagement.
Listen
Award-Winning Poster Presentations From AMCP 2024
April 23rd 2024At the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) 2024 annual meeting, multiple poster presentations concerned with health equity, data collection, glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, and more were acknowledged for their originality, relevance, clarity, bias, and quality.
Read More