Randomized controlled trials in de-implementation research : a systematic scoping review
Raudasoja, Aleksi J.; Falkenbach, Petra; Vernooij, Robin W. M.; Mustonen, Jussi M. J.; Agarwal, Arnav; Aoki, Yoshitaka; Blanker, Marco H.; Cartwright, Rufus; Garcia-Perdomo, Herney A.; Kilpeläinen, Tuomas P.; Lainiala, Olli; Lamberg, Tiina; Nevalainen, Olli P. O.; Raittio, Eero; Richard, Patrick O.; Violette, Philippe D.; Komulainen, Jorma; Sipilä, Raija; Tikkinen, Kari A. O. (2022-10-01)
Raudasoja, A.J., Falkenbach, P., Vernooij, R.W.M. et al. Randomized controlled trials in de-implementation research: a systematic scoping review. Implementation Sci 17, 65 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01238-z
© The Author(s) 2022. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023020125437
Tiivistelmä
Abstract
Background: Healthcare costs are rising, and a substantial proportion of medical care is of little value. De-implementation of low-value practices is important for improving overall health outcomes and reducing costs. We aimed to identify and synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on de-implementation interventions and to provide guidance to improve future research.
Methods: MEDLINE and Scopus up to May 24, 2021, for individual and cluster RCTs comparing de-implementation interventions to usual care, another intervention, or placebo. We applied independent duplicate assessment of eligibility, study characteristics, outcomes, intervention categories, implementation theories, and risk of bias.
Results: Of the 227 eligible trials, 145 (64%) were cluster randomized trials (median 24 clusters; median follow-up time 305 days), and 82 (36%) were individually randomized trials (median follow-up time 274 days). Of the trials, 118 (52%) were published after 2010, 149 (66%) were conducted in a primary care setting, 163 (72%) aimed to reduce the use of drug treatment, 194 (85%) measured the total volume of care, and 64 (28%) low-value care use as outcomes. Of the trials, 48 (21%) described a theoretical basis for the intervention, and 40 (18%) had the study tailored by context-specific factors. Of the de-implementation interventions, 193 (85%) were targeted at physicians, 115 (51%) tested educational sessions, and 152 (67%) multicomponent interventions. Missing data led to high risk of bias in 137 (60%) trials, followed by baseline imbalances in 99 (44%), and deficiencies in allocation concealment in 56 (25%).
Conclusions: De-implementation trials were mainly conducted in primary care and typically aimed to reduce low-value drug treatments. Limitations of current de-implementation research may have led to unreliable effect estimates and decreased clinical applicability of studied de-implementation strategies. We identified potential research gaps, including de-implementation in secondary and tertiary care settings, and interventions targeted at other than physicians. Future trials could be improved by favoring simpler intervention designs, better control of potential confounders, larger number of clusters in cluster trials, considering context-specific factors when planning the intervention (tailoring), and using a theoretical basis in intervention design.
Kokoelmat
- Avoin saatavuus [31657]
Samankaltainen aineisto
Näytetään aineisto, joilla on samankaltaisia nimekkeitä, tekijöitä tai asiasanoja.
-
Prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (the RYSA trial) : trial protocol and interim analysis
Saarinen, Tuure; Meriläinen, Sanna; Koivukangas, Vesa; Pietiläinen, Kirsi Hannele; Juuti, Anne
Trials : 1 (Springer Nature, 30.12.2019) -
Psychosocial determinants for adherence to a healthy lifestyle and intervention participation in the FINGER trial : an exploratory analysis of a randomised clinical trial
Neuvonen, Elisa; Lehtisalo, Jenni; Solomon, Alina; Antikainen, Riitta; Havulinna, Satu; Hänninen, Tuomo; Laatikainen, Tiina; Lindström, Jaana; Rautio, Nina; Soininen, Hilkka; Strandberg, Timo; Tuomilehto, Jaakko; Kivipelto, Miia; Ngandu, Tiia
Aging clinical and experimental research : 8 (Springer Nature, 19.02.2022) -
Associations of depressive symptoms and cognition in the FINGER trial : a secondary analysis of a randomised clinical trial
Neuvonen, Elisa; Lehtisalo, Jenni; Ngandu, Tiia; Levälahti, Esko; Antikainen, Riitta; Hänninen, Tuomo; Laatikainen, Tiina; Lindström, Jaana; Paajanen, Teemu; Soininen, Hilkka; Strandberg, Timo; Tuomilehto, Jaakko; Kivipelto, Miia; Solomon, Alina
Journal of clinical medicine : 5 (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 07.03.2022)