Randomized Registry Trials - efficient post market clinical follow-up for medical devices

Q4 Engineering
Matthias Leuchter, Stefan Siewert, Michael Stiehm, Andrea Bock, Klaus-Peter Schmitz, Sebastian Kaule, Ernst Klar
{"title":"Randomized Registry Trials - efficient post market clinical follow-up for medical devices","authors":"Matthias Leuchter, Stefan Siewert, Michael Stiehm, Andrea Bock, Klaus-Peter Schmitz, Sebastian Kaule, Ernst Klar","doi":"10.1515/cdbme-2023-1122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In spite of advances in the treatment of cardiovascular disease, there remains a significant need for high-quality evidence for clinical practice given the rising prevalence worldwide. Next to the increase of regulatory requirements, poor screening-to-recruitment ratios, lack of patient engagement, and long timelines for contracting and institutional review board (IRB) approval are leading to an outflow of clinical trials in the EU. Patient registries are a potentially rich source of data, especially for evaluating the course of rare diseases and effects of new treatments. In the sectors of regulatory assessments of medical devices they are greatly underused. Health-related real world data provide crucial support for regulatory decision-making, particularly post-market assessments of medical products. Registries can be used not only for observational studies, but also for conducting experimental study designs. Register-based randomized controlled trials (RRCTs) are of particular importance here, as they can combine the advantages of randomized controlled trials (RCT) and registers. The government's financial support and reduction of regulatory barriers to the implementation of registry-based RCT are incentive factors for manufacturers to let their medical devices (re-)certified. Furthermore, it is essential that the necessary criteria are already taken into account when setting up the German implant registry in order to enable future RRCTs. The presented work is an additional pleading for the use and extension of registries for all medical products.","PeriodicalId":10739,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering","volume":"2012 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2023-1122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In spite of advances in the treatment of cardiovascular disease, there remains a significant need for high-quality evidence for clinical practice given the rising prevalence worldwide. Next to the increase of regulatory requirements, poor screening-to-recruitment ratios, lack of patient engagement, and long timelines for contracting and institutional review board (IRB) approval are leading to an outflow of clinical trials in the EU. Patient registries are a potentially rich source of data, especially for evaluating the course of rare diseases and effects of new treatments. In the sectors of regulatory assessments of medical devices they are greatly underused. Health-related real world data provide crucial support for regulatory decision-making, particularly post-market assessments of medical products. Registries can be used not only for observational studies, but also for conducting experimental study designs. Register-based randomized controlled trials (RRCTs) are of particular importance here, as they can combine the advantages of randomized controlled trials (RCT) and registers. The government's financial support and reduction of regulatory barriers to the implementation of registry-based RCT are incentive factors for manufacturers to let their medical devices (re-)certified. Furthermore, it is essential that the necessary criteria are already taken into account when setting up the German implant registry in order to enable future RRCTs. The presented work is an additional pleading for the use and extension of registries for all medical products.
随机注册试验:有效的医疗器械上市后临床随访
尽管心血管疾病的治疗取得了进展,但鉴于全球范围内发病率的上升,临床实践仍然需要高质量的证据。除了监管要求的增加之外,筛选与招募比率低、患者参与度低、合同签订和机构审查委员会(IRB)批准的时间过长,这些都导致了欧盟临床试验的外流。患者登记是一个潜在的丰富数据来源,特别是用于评估罕见疾病的病程和新疗法的效果。在医疗器械的监管评估部门,它们的使用严重不足。与健康相关的真实世界数据为监管决策,特别是医疗产品上市后评估提供了至关重要的支持。登记不仅可用于观察性研究,也可用于进行实验研究设计。基于注册表的随机对照试验(RRCTs)在这里特别重要,因为它们可以结合随机对照试验(RCT)和注册表的优点。政府的财政支持和减少基于注册的RCT实施的监管障碍是激励制造商让他们的医疗器械(重新)认证的因素。此外,在建立德国植入物注册时,必须考虑到必要的标准,以便实现未来的随机对照试验。提出的工作是一个额外的恳求,为所有医疗产品的使用和扩展注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering
Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering Engineering-Biomedical Engineering
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
239
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信