Cargando…
Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices
Clinical evidence available for the assessment of medical devices (MDs) is frequently insufficient. New MDs should be subjected to high quality clinical studies to demonstrate their benefit to patients. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the study design reaching the highest level of evidence...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4181748/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25285025 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S63869 |
_version_ | 1782337412829020160 |
---|---|
author | Bernard, Alain Vaneau, Michel Fournel, Isabelle Galmiche, Hubert Nony, Patrice Dubernard, Jean Michel |
author_facet | Bernard, Alain Vaneau, Michel Fournel, Isabelle Galmiche, Hubert Nony, Patrice Dubernard, Jean Michel |
author_sort | Bernard, Alain |
collection | PubMed |
description | Clinical evidence available for the assessment of medical devices (MDs) is frequently insufficient. New MDs should be subjected to high quality clinical studies to demonstrate their benefit to patients. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the study design reaching the highest level of evidence in order to demonstrate the efficacy of a new MD. However, the clinical context of some MDs makes it difficult to carry out a conventional RCT. The objectives of this review are to present problems related to conducting conventional RCTs and to identify other experimental designs, their limitations, and their applications. A systematic literature search was conducted for the period January 2000 to July 2012 by searching medical bibliographic databases. Problems related to conducting conventional RCTs of MDs were identified: timing the assessment, eligible population and recruitment, acceptability, blinding, choice of comparator group, and learning curve. Other types of experimental designs have been described. Zelen’s design trials and randomized consent design trials facilitate the recruitment of patients, but can cause ethical problems to arise. Expertise-based RCTs involve randomization to a team that specializes in a given intervention. Sometimes, the feasibility of an expertise-based randomized trial may be greater than that of a conventional trial. Cross-over trials reduce the number of patients, but are not applicable when a learning curve is required. Sequential trials have the advantage of allowing a trial to be stopped early depending on the results of first inclusions, but they require an independent committee. Bayesian methods combine existing information with information from the ongoing trial. These methods are particularly useful in situations where the number of subjects is small. The disadvantage is the risk of including erroneous prior information. Other types of experimental designs exist when conventional trials cannot always be applied to the clinical development of MDs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4181748 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-41817482014-10-03 Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices Bernard, Alain Vaneau, Michel Fournel, Isabelle Galmiche, Hubert Nony, Patrice Dubernard, Jean Michel Med Devices (Auckl) Review Clinical evidence available for the assessment of medical devices (MDs) is frequently insufficient. New MDs should be subjected to high quality clinical studies to demonstrate their benefit to patients. The randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the study design reaching the highest level of evidence in order to demonstrate the efficacy of a new MD. However, the clinical context of some MDs makes it difficult to carry out a conventional RCT. The objectives of this review are to present problems related to conducting conventional RCTs and to identify other experimental designs, their limitations, and their applications. A systematic literature search was conducted for the period January 2000 to July 2012 by searching medical bibliographic databases. Problems related to conducting conventional RCTs of MDs were identified: timing the assessment, eligible population and recruitment, acceptability, blinding, choice of comparator group, and learning curve. Other types of experimental designs have been described. Zelen’s design trials and randomized consent design trials facilitate the recruitment of patients, but can cause ethical problems to arise. Expertise-based RCTs involve randomization to a team that specializes in a given intervention. Sometimes, the feasibility of an expertise-based randomized trial may be greater than that of a conventional trial. Cross-over trials reduce the number of patients, but are not applicable when a learning curve is required. Sequential trials have the advantage of allowing a trial to be stopped early depending on the results of first inclusions, but they require an independent committee. Bayesian methods combine existing information with information from the ongoing trial. These methods are particularly useful in situations where the number of subjects is small. The disadvantage is the risk of including erroneous prior information. Other types of experimental designs exist when conventional trials cannot always be applied to the clinical development of MDs. Dove Medical Press 2014-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC4181748/ /pubmed/25285025 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S63869 Text en © 2014 Bernard et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. |
spellingShingle | Review Bernard, Alain Vaneau, Michel Fournel, Isabelle Galmiche, Hubert Nony, Patrice Dubernard, Jean Michel Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
title | Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
title_full | Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
title_fullStr | Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
title_full_unstemmed | Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
title_short | Methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
title_sort | methodological choices for the clinical development of medical devices |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4181748/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25285025 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S63869 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bernardalain methodologicalchoicesfortheclinicaldevelopmentofmedicaldevices AT vaneaumichel methodologicalchoicesfortheclinicaldevelopmentofmedicaldevices AT fournelisabelle methodologicalchoicesfortheclinicaldevelopmentofmedicaldevices AT galmichehubert methodologicalchoicesfortheclinicaldevelopmentofmedicaldevices AT nonypatrice methodologicalchoicesfortheclinicaldevelopmentofmedicaldevices AT dubernardjeanmichel methodologicalchoicesfortheclinicaldevelopmentofmedicaldevices |