Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Trials ; 23(1): 532, 2022 Jun 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35761367

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: More than a third of the 65,000 people living with kidney failure in the UK attend a dialysis unit 2-5 times a week to have their blood cleaned for 3-5 h. In haemodialysis (HD), toxins are removed by diffusion, which can be enhanced using a high-flux dialyser. This can be augmented with convection, as occurs in haemodiafiltration (HDF), and improved outcomes have been reported in people who are able to achieve high volumes of convection. This study compares the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of high-volume HDF compared with high-flux HD in the treatment of kidney failure. METHODS: This is a UK-based, multi-centre, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Adult patients already receiving HD or HDF will be randomised 1:1 to high-volume HDF (aiming for 21+ L of substitution fluid adjusted for body surface area) or high-flux HD. Exclusion criteria include lack of capacity to consent, life expectancy less than 3 months, on HD/HDF for less than 4 weeks, planned living kidney donor transplant or home dialysis scheduled within 3 months, prior intolerance of HDF and not suitable for high-volume HDF for other clinical reasons. The primary outcome is a composite of non-cancer mortality or hospital admission with a cardiovascular event or infection during follow-up (minimum 32 months, maximum 91 months) determined from routine data. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular- and infection-related morbidity and mortality, health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact. Baseline data will be collected by research personnel on-site. Follow-up data will be collected by linkage to routine healthcare databases - Hospital Episode Statistics, Civil Registration, Public Health England and the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) in England, and equivalent databases in Scotland and Wales, as necessary - and centrally administered patient-completed questionnaires. In addition, research personnel on-site will monitor for adverse events and collect data on adherence to the protocol (monthly during recruitment and quarterly during follow-up). DISCUSSION: This study will provide evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HD as compared to HDF for adults with kidney failure in-centre HD or HDF. It will inform management for this patient group in the UK and internationally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN10997319 . Registered on 10 October 2017.


Asunto(s)
Hemodiafiltración , Fallo Renal Crónico , Insuficiencia Renal , Adulto , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Atención a la Salud , Hemodiafiltración/efectos adversos , Hemodiafiltración/métodos , Humanos , Fallo Renal Crónico/diagnóstico , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Calidad de Vida , Sistema de Registros , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Diálisis Renal/métodos , Insuficiencia Renal/etiología
2.
Trials ; 19(1): 18, 2018 Jan 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29310706

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The 'trials within cohorts' (TwiC) design is a pragmatic approach to randomised trials in which trial participants are randomly selected from an existing cohort. The design has multiple potential benefits, including the option of conducting multiple trials within the same cohort. MAIN TEXT: To date, the TwiC design methodology been used in numerous clinical settings but has never been applied to a clinical trial of an investigational medicinal product (CTIMP). We have recently secured the necessary approvals to undertake the first CTIMP using the TwiC design. In this paper, we describe some of the considerations and modifications required to ensure such a trial is compliant with Good Clinical Practice and international clinical trials regulations. We advocate using a two-stage consent process and using the consent stages to explicitly differentiate between trial participants and cohort participants who are providing control data. This distinction ensured compliance but had consequences with respect to costings, recruitment and the trial assessment schedule. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated that it is possible to secure ethical and regulatory approval for a CTIMP TwiC. By including certain considerations at the trial design stage, we believe this pragmatic and efficient methodology could be utilised in other CTIMPs in future.


Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos Pragmáticos como Asunto/métodos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/métodos , Proyectos de Investigación , Comités de Ética , Humanos , Consentimiento Informado , Selección de Paciente , Ensayos Clínicos Pragmáticos como Asunto/ética , Ensayos Clínicos Pragmáticos como Asunto/normas , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/ética , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/normas , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Apoyo a la Investigación como Asunto , Flujo de Trabajo
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA