Outcomes for clinical trials involving adults with chronic kidney disease: a multinational Delphi survey involving patients, caregivers and health professionals.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 TRANSPLANTATION
Andrea Matus Gonzalez, Nicole Evangelidis, Martin Howell, Allison Jaure, Benedicte Sautenet, Magdalena Madero, Gloria Ashuntantang, Samaya Anumudu, Amelie Bernier-Jean, Louese Dunn, Yeoungjee Cho, Laura Cortes Sanabria, Ian H de Boer, Samuel Fung, Daniel Gallego, Chandana Guha, Andrew S Levey, Adeera Levin, Eduardo Lorca, Ikechi G Okpechi, Patrick Rossignol, Nicole Scholes-Robertson, Laura Sola, Armando Teixeira-Pinto, Tim Usherwood, Andrea K Viecelli, David C Wheeler, Katherine Widders, Martin Wilkie, Jonathan C Craig
{"title":"Outcomes for clinical trials involving adults with chronic kidney disease: a multinational Delphi survey involving patients, caregivers and health professionals.","authors":"Andrea Matus Gonzalez, Nicole Evangelidis, Martin Howell, Allison Jaure, Benedicte Sautenet, Magdalena Madero, Gloria Ashuntantang, Samaya Anumudu, Amelie Bernier-Jean, Louese Dunn, Yeoungjee Cho, Laura Cortes Sanabria, Ian H de Boer, Samuel Fung, Daniel Gallego, Chandana Guha, Andrew S Levey, Adeera Levin, Eduardo Lorca, Ikechi G Okpechi, Patrick Rossignol, Nicole Scholes-Robertson, Laura Sola, Armando Teixeira-Pinto, Tim Usherwood, Andrea K Viecelli, David C Wheeler, Katherine Widders, Martin Wilkie, Jonathan C Craig","doi":"10.1093/ndt/gfae010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many outcomes of high priority to patients and clinicians are infrequently and inconsistently reported across trials in chronic kidney disease (CKD), which generates research waste and limits evidence-informed decision making. We aimed to generate consensus among patients/caregivers and health professionals on critically important outcomes for trials in CKD prior to kidney failure and the need for kidney replacement therapy, and to describe the reasons for their choices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an online two-round international Delphi survey. Adult patients with CKD (all stages and diagnoses), caregivers and health professionals who could read English, Spanish or French were eligible. Participants rated the importance of outcomes using a Likert scale (7-9 indicating critical importance) and a Best-Worst Scale. The scores for the two groups were assessed to determine absolute and relative importance. Comments were analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 1399 participants from 73 countries completed Round 1 of the Delphi survey, including 628 (45%) patients/caregivers and 771 (55%) health professionals. In Round 2, 790 participants (56% response rate) from 63 countries completed the survey including 383 (48%) patients/caregivers and 407 (52%) health professionals. The overall top five outcomes were: kidney function, need for dialysis/transplant, life participation, cardiovascular disease and death. In the final round, patients/caregivers indicated higher scores for most outcomes (17/22 outcomes), and health professionals gave higher priority to mortality, hospitalization and cardiovascular disease (mean difference >0.3). Consensus was based upon the two groups yielding median scores of ≥7 and mean scores >7, and the proportions of both groups rating the outcome as 'critically important' being >50%. Four themes reflected the reasons for their priorities: imminent threat of a health catastrophe, signifying diminishing capacities, ability to self-manage and cope, and tangible and direct consequences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Across trials in CKD, the outcomes of highest priority to patients, caregivers and health professionals were kidney function, need for dialysis/transplant, life participation, cardiovascular disease and death.</p>","PeriodicalId":19078,"journal":{"name":"Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfae010","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Many outcomes of high priority to patients and clinicians are infrequently and inconsistently reported across trials in chronic kidney disease (CKD), which generates research waste and limits evidence-informed decision making. We aimed to generate consensus among patients/caregivers and health professionals on critically important outcomes for trials in CKD prior to kidney failure and the need for kidney replacement therapy, and to describe the reasons for their choices.

Methods: This was an online two-round international Delphi survey. Adult patients with CKD (all stages and diagnoses), caregivers and health professionals who could read English, Spanish or French were eligible. Participants rated the importance of outcomes using a Likert scale (7-9 indicating critical importance) and a Best-Worst Scale. The scores for the two groups were assessed to determine absolute and relative importance. Comments were analysed thematically.

Results: In total, 1399 participants from 73 countries completed Round 1 of the Delphi survey, including 628 (45%) patients/caregivers and 771 (55%) health professionals. In Round 2, 790 participants (56% response rate) from 63 countries completed the survey including 383 (48%) patients/caregivers and 407 (52%) health professionals. The overall top five outcomes were: kidney function, need for dialysis/transplant, life participation, cardiovascular disease and death. In the final round, patients/caregivers indicated higher scores for most outcomes (17/22 outcomes), and health professionals gave higher priority to mortality, hospitalization and cardiovascular disease (mean difference >0.3). Consensus was based upon the two groups yielding median scores of ≥7 and mean scores >7, and the proportions of both groups rating the outcome as 'critically important' being >50%. Four themes reflected the reasons for their priorities: imminent threat of a health catastrophe, signifying diminishing capacities, ability to self-manage and cope, and tangible and direct consequences.

Conclusion: Across trials in CKD, the outcomes of highest priority to patients, caregivers and health professionals were kidney function, need for dialysis/transplant, life participation, cardiovascular disease and death.

成人慢性肾病患者临床试验的结果:一项由患者、护理人员和医疗专业人员参与的多国德尔菲调查。
背景:对于患者和临床医生来说,许多重要的结果在 CKD 试验中很少报告且报告不一致,这造成了研究浪费并限制了循证决策。我们的目的是让患者/护理人员和医疗专业人员就肾衰竭前和需要肾脏替代治疗的 CKD 试验中至关重要的结果达成共识,并描述他们做出选择的原因:方法:在线进行两轮德尔菲国际调查。符合条件的 CKD 成年患者(所有阶段和诊断)、护理人员和医疗专业人员均能阅读英语、西班牙语或法语。参与者采用李克特量表(7-9 分表示至关重要)和最佳-最差量表对结果的重要性进行评分。对两组的得分进行评估,以确定绝对和相对重要性。结果:共有来自 73 个国家的 1 399 名参与者完成了第一轮德尔菲调查,其中包括 628 名患者/护理人员(45%)和 771 名医疗专业人员(55%)。在第二轮调查中,来自 63 个国家的 790 名参与者(回复率 56%)完成了调查,其中包括 383 名患者/护理人员(48%)和 407 名医疗专业人员(52%)。总的前五项结果是:肾功能、透析/移植需求、生命参与、心血管疾病和死亡。在最后一轮中,患者/护理人员对大多数结果(17/22 项结果)的评分较高,而医疗专业人员对死亡率、住院治疗和心血管疾病的优先级较高(平均差异 > 0.3)。达成共识的基础是两组的中位数得分≥ 7 分,平均分大于 7 分,且两组将结果评为 "极其重要 "的比例均大于 50%。四个主题反映了他们优先考虑的原因:迫在眉睫的健康灾难威胁、能力减退的标志、自我管理和应对能力以及有形和直接的后果:在所有慢性肾脏病试验中,患者、护理人员和医疗专业人员最优先考虑的结果是肾功能、透析/移植需求、生命参与、心血管疾病和死亡。
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
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
10.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
1431
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation (ndt) is the leading nephrology journal in Europe and renowned worldwide, devoted to original clinical and laboratory research in nephrology, dialysis and transplantation. ndt is an official journal of the [ERA-EDTA](http://www.era-edta.org/) (European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association). Published monthly, the journal provides an essential resource for researchers and clinicians throughout the world. All research articles in this journal have undergone peer review. Print ISSN: 0931-0509.
×
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