4.6 Review

Platform trials for anaesthesia and perioperative medicine: a narrative review

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA
卷 130, 期 6, 页码 677-686

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2022.10.030

关键词

adaptive designs; anaesthesiology; clinical trials; comparative effectiveness research; statistics; translation; surgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Large randomised trials are the most reliable way to assess new treatments in clinical practice, but they can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. A clinical trial platform focused on a specific condition or surgery type can increase efficiency by comparing multiple treatments and allowing for changes during the trial. This can speed up knowledge acquisition and identify effective or harmful treatments faster. Platform trials have great potential in perioperative medicine to provide quicker answers to important clinical questions and improve patient care.
Large randomised trials provide the most reliable evidence of effectiveness of new treatments in clinical practice. However, the time and resources required to complete such trials can be daunting. An overarching clinical trial platform focused on a single condition or type of surgery, aiming to compare several treatments, with an option to stop any or add in new treatment options, can provide greater efficiency. This has the potential to accelerate knowledge acquisition and identify effective, ineffective, or harmful treatments faster. The master protocol of the platform defines the study population(s) and standardised procedures. Ineffective or harmful treatments can be discarded or study drug dose modified during the life cycle of the trial. Other adaptive elements that can be modified include eligibility criteria, required sample size for any comparison(s), randomisation assignment ratio, and the addition of other promising treatment options. There are excellent opportunities for anaesthetists to establish platform trials in perioperative medicine. Platform trials are highly efficient, with the potential to provide quicker answers to important clinical ques-tions that lead to improved patient care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据