Alexander C Gregg, Ruth Masterson Creber, John A Spertus, Gregg W Stone, Mario F Gaudino
{"title":"Adding the patient perspective: the necessity of patient reported outcomes in cardiac surgery clinical trials.","authors":"Alexander C Gregg, Ruth Masterson Creber, John A Spertus, Gregg W Stone, Mario F Gaudino","doi":"10.1097/HCO.0000000000001239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>This review highlights the growing importance of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in cardiac surgery trials. Cardiac surgery trials have traditionally focused on cardiovascular events such as survival, stroke or myocardial infarction. However, as surgical outcomes have continued to improve, incorporating the patient's perspective through PROs has become increasingly critical. Incorporating PROs as key study outcomes provides essential patient data, while also overcoming the methodological limitations of classic composite endpoints.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Continued advancements in cardiac surgery have significantly reduced classic endpoint differentials, making it challenging to evaluate interventions with their use alone. PROs offer more granular details on the effects of surgical interventions compared to classic clinical events and are widely used in other medical fields. More recently, cardiac surgery trials have begun successfully implementing PROs, though there is need for greater utilization across the discipline.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The integration of PROs into cardiac surgery trials allows for better understanding of the impact of surgical interventions on patients' daily lives. While barriers exist, efforts to develop and standardize PRO measures promise to enhance the relevance of cardiac surgery clinical trials and ultimately improve patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55197,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"350-356"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12221202/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HCO.0000000000001239","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose of review: This review highlights the growing importance of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in cardiac surgery trials. Cardiac surgery trials have traditionally focused on cardiovascular events such as survival, stroke or myocardial infarction. However, as surgical outcomes have continued to improve, incorporating the patient's perspective through PROs has become increasingly critical. Incorporating PROs as key study outcomes provides essential patient data, while also overcoming the methodological limitations of classic composite endpoints.
Recent findings: Continued advancements in cardiac surgery have significantly reduced classic endpoint differentials, making it challenging to evaluate interventions with their use alone. PROs offer more granular details on the effects of surgical interventions compared to classic clinical events and are widely used in other medical fields. More recently, cardiac surgery trials have begun successfully implementing PROs, though there is need for greater utilization across the discipline.
Summary: The integration of PROs into cardiac surgery trials allows for better understanding of the impact of surgical interventions on patients' daily lives. While barriers exist, efforts to develop and standardize PRO measures promise to enhance the relevance of cardiac surgery clinical trials and ultimately improve patient care.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Cardiology is a bimonthly publication offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field. Each issue features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With fourteen disciplines published across the year – including arrhythmias, molecular genetics, HDL cholesterol and clinical trials – every issue also contains annotated reference detailing the merits of the most important papers.