Trial outcomes and information for clinical decision-making: a comparative study of opinions of health professionals.

Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101263253 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1745-6215 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 17456215 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Trials Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: [London] : BioMed Central, 2006-

Attitude of Health Personnel* ; Clinical Decision-Making* ; Colectomy*/adverse effects ; Evidence-Based Medicine* ; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice* ; Research Design*; Colorectal Neoplasms/*surgery ; Nurses/*psychology ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic/*methods ; Surgeons/*psychology; Adult ; Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology ; Delphi Technique ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Patient Selection ; Postoperative Complications/etiology ; Quality of Life ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Treatment Outcome

Background: Trials are robust sources of data for clinical practice; however, trial outcomes may not reflect what is important to communicate for decision-making. The study compared clinicians' views of outcomes to include in a core outcome set for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery, with what clinicians considered important information for clinical practice (core information).
Methods: Potential outcome/information domains were identified through systematic literature reviews, reviews of hospital information leaflets and interviews with patients. These were organized into six categories and used to design a questionnaire survey that asked surgeons and nurses from a sample of CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain as an outcome or as information on a nine-point Likert scale. Respondents were re-surveyed (round 2) following group feedback (Delphi methods). Comparisons were made by calculating the difference in mean scores between the outcomes and information domains, and paired t tests were used to explore the difference between mean scores of the six outcome/information categories.
Results: Data sources identified 1216 outcome/information items for CRC surgery that informed a 94-item questionnaire. First-round questionnaires were returned from 63/81 (78 %) of centers. Clinicians rated 76/94 (84 %) domains of higher importance to measure in trials than information to communicate to patients in round 1. This was reduced to 24/47 (51 %) in round 2. The greatest difference was evident in domains regarding survival, which was rated much more highly as a trial outcome than an important piece of information for decision-making (difference in mean 2.3, 95 % CI 1.9 to 2.8, p <0.0001). Specific complications and quality-of-life domains were rated similarly (difference in mean 0.18, 95 % CI -0.1 to 0.4, p = 0.2 and difference in mean 0.2, 95 % CI -0.1 to 0.5, p = 0.2, respectively).
Conclusions: Whilst clinicians want to measure key outcomes in trials, they rate these as less important to communicate in decision-making with patients. This discrepancy needs to be explored and addressed to maximize the impact of trials on clinical practice.

BMJ. 2000 Apr 1;320(7239):909-13. (PMID: 10742000)
Trials. 2012 Aug 06;13:132. (PMID: 22867278)
Trials. 2014 Feb 05;15:49. (PMID: 24495582)
Br J Surg. 2015 Jul;102(8):936-43. (PMID: 25980524)
Br J Cancer. 2001 Jan 5;84(1):48-51. (PMID: 11139312)
Patient Educ Couns. 2005 Jun;57(3):250-61. (PMID: 15893206)
Colorectal Dis. 2015 Nov;17(11):O217-29. (PMID: 26058878)
Colorectal Dis. 2013;15(10):e548-60. (PMID: 23926896)
Midwifery. 2014 Dec;30(12):1147-8. (PMID: 25434973)

MR/K025643/1 United Kingdom MRC_ Medical Research Council

Date Created: 20160727 Date Completed: 20180105 Latest Revision: 20220129

20231215

PMC4960891

10.1186/s13063-016-1492-0

27456848