Cargando…

BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS

Objectives: The aim of this study is to describe and illustrate a method to obtain early estimates of the effectiveness of a new version of a medical device. Methods: In the absence of empirical data, expert opinion may be elicited on the expected difference between the conventional and modified dev...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Youn, Ji-Hee, Lord, Joanne, Hemming, Karla, Girling, Alan, Buxton, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3339879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22559753
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462312000037
_version_ 1782231429989531648
author Youn, Ji-Hee
Lord, Joanne
Hemming, Karla
Girling, Alan
Buxton, Martin
author_facet Youn, Ji-Hee
Lord, Joanne
Hemming, Karla
Girling, Alan
Buxton, Martin
author_sort Youn, Ji-Hee
collection PubMed
description Objectives: The aim of this study is to describe and illustrate a method to obtain early estimates of the effectiveness of a new version of a medical device. Methods: In the absence of empirical data, expert opinion may be elicited on the expected difference between the conventional and modified devices. Bayesian Mixed Treatment Comparison (MTC) meta-analysis can then be used to combine this expert opinion with existing trial data on earlier versions of the device. We illustrate this approach for a new four-pole implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) compared with conventional ICDs, Class III anti-arrhythmic drugs, and conventional drug therapy for the prevention of sudden cardiac death in high risk patients. Existing RCTs were identified from a published systematic review, and we elicited opinion on the difference between four-pole and conventional ICDs from experts recruited at a cardiology conference. Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials were identified. Seven experts provided valid probability distributions for the new ICDs compared with current devices. The MTC model resulted in estimated relative risks of mortality of 0.74 (0.60–0.89) (predictive relative risk [RR] = 0.77 [0.41–1.26]) and 0.83 (0.70–0.97) (predictive RR = 0.84 [0.55–1.22]) with the new ICD therapy compared to Class III anti-arrhythmic drug therapy and conventional drug therapy, respectively. These results showed negligible differences from the preliminary results for the existing ICDs. Conclusions: The proposed method incorporating expert opinion to adjust for a modification made to an existing device may play a useful role in assisting decision makers to make early informed judgments on the effectiveness of frequently modified healthcare technologies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3339879
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33398792012-05-16 BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS Youn, Ji-Hee Lord, Joanne Hemming, Karla Girling, Alan Buxton, Martin Int J Technol Assess Health Care Assessments Objectives: The aim of this study is to describe and illustrate a method to obtain early estimates of the effectiveness of a new version of a medical device. Methods: In the absence of empirical data, expert opinion may be elicited on the expected difference between the conventional and modified devices. Bayesian Mixed Treatment Comparison (MTC) meta-analysis can then be used to combine this expert opinion with existing trial data on earlier versions of the device. We illustrate this approach for a new four-pole implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) compared with conventional ICDs, Class III anti-arrhythmic drugs, and conventional drug therapy for the prevention of sudden cardiac death in high risk patients. Existing RCTs were identified from a published systematic review, and we elicited opinion on the difference between four-pole and conventional ICDs from experts recruited at a cardiology conference. Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials were identified. Seven experts provided valid probability distributions for the new ICDs compared with current devices. The MTC model resulted in estimated relative risks of mortality of 0.74 (0.60–0.89) (predictive relative risk [RR] = 0.77 [0.41–1.26]) and 0.83 (0.70–0.97) (predictive RR = 0.84 [0.55–1.22]) with the new ICD therapy compared to Class III anti-arrhythmic drug therapy and conventional drug therapy, respectively. These results showed negligible differences from the preliminary results for the existing ICDs. Conclusions: The proposed method incorporating expert opinion to adjust for a modification made to an existing device may play a useful role in assisting decision makers to make early informed judgments on the effectiveness of frequently modified healthcare technologies. Cambridge University Press 2012-04 2012-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3339879/ /pubmed/22559753 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462312000037 Text en Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012. The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/>. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/>. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/>) The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
spellingShingle Assessments
Youn, Ji-Hee
Lord, Joanne
Hemming, Karla
Girling, Alan
Buxton, Martin
BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS
title BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS
title_full BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS
title_fullStr BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS
title_full_unstemmed BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS
title_short BAYESIAN META-ANALYSIS ON MEDICAL DEVICES: APPLICATION TO IMPLANTABLE CARDIOVERTER DEFIBRILLATORS
title_sort bayesian meta-analysis on medical devices: application to implantable cardioverter defibrillators
topic Assessments
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3339879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22559753
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462312000037
work_keys_str_mv AT younjihee bayesianmetaanalysisonmedicaldevicesapplicationtoimplantablecardioverterdefibrillators
AT lordjoanne bayesianmetaanalysisonmedicaldevicesapplicationtoimplantablecardioverterdefibrillators
AT hemmingkarla bayesianmetaanalysisonmedicaldevicesapplicationtoimplantablecardioverterdefibrillators
AT girlingalan bayesianmetaanalysisonmedicaldevicesapplicationtoimplantablecardioverterdefibrillators
AT buxtonmartin bayesianmetaanalysisonmedicaldevicesapplicationtoimplantablecardioverterdefibrillators