Cargando…

Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To explore the methodologies employed in studies assessing transition of care interventions, with the aim of defining goals for the improvement of future studies. DESIGN: Systematic review of comparative studies assessing transition to adult care interventions for young people with chroni...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Le Roux, E, Mellerio, H, Guilmin-Crépon, S, Gottot, S, Jacquin, P, Boulkedid, R, Alberti, C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5278245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28131998
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012338
_version_ 1782502615674781696
author Le Roux, E
Mellerio, H
Guilmin-Crépon, S
Gottot, S
Jacquin, P
Boulkedid, R
Alberti, C
author_facet Le Roux, E
Mellerio, H
Guilmin-Crépon, S
Gottot, S
Jacquin, P
Boulkedid, R
Alberti, C
author_sort Le Roux, E
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To explore the methodologies employed in studies assessing transition of care interventions, with the aim of defining goals for the improvement of future studies. DESIGN: Systematic review of comparative studies assessing transition to adult care interventions for young people with chronic conditions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrial.gov. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: 2 reviewers screened comparative studies with experimental and quasi-experimental designs, published or registered before July 2015. Eligible studies evaluate transition interventions at least in part after transfer to adult care of young people with chronic conditions with at least one outcome assessed quantitatively. RESULTS: 39 studies were reviewed, 26/39 (67%) published their final results and 13/39 (33%) were in progress. In 9 studies (9/39, 23%) comparisons were made between preintervention and postintervention in a single group. Randomised control groups were used in 9/39 (23%) studies. 2 (2/39, 5%) reported blinding strategies. Use of validated questionnaires was reported in 28% (11/39) of studies. In terms of reporting in published studies 15/26 (58%) did not report age at transfer, and 6/26 (23%) did not report the time of collection of each outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Few evaluative studies exist and their level of methodological quality is variable. The complexity of interventions, multiplicity of outcomes, difficulty of blinding and the small groups of patients have consequences on concluding on the effectiveness of interventions. The evaluation of the transition interventions requires an appropriate and common methodology which will provide access to a better level of evidence. We identified areas for improvement in terms of randomisation, recruitment and external validity, blinding, measurement validity, standardised assessment and reporting. Improvements will increase our capacity to determine effective interventions for transition care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5278245
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52782452017-02-07 Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review Le Roux, E Mellerio, H Guilmin-Crépon, S Gottot, S Jacquin, P Boulkedid, R Alberti, C BMJ Open Research Methods OBJECTIVE: To explore the methodologies employed in studies assessing transition of care interventions, with the aim of defining goals for the improvement of future studies. DESIGN: Systematic review of comparative studies assessing transition to adult care interventions for young people with chronic conditions. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrial.gov. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: 2 reviewers screened comparative studies with experimental and quasi-experimental designs, published or registered before July 2015. Eligible studies evaluate transition interventions at least in part after transfer to adult care of young people with chronic conditions with at least one outcome assessed quantitatively. RESULTS: 39 studies were reviewed, 26/39 (67%) published their final results and 13/39 (33%) were in progress. In 9 studies (9/39, 23%) comparisons were made between preintervention and postintervention in a single group. Randomised control groups were used in 9/39 (23%) studies. 2 (2/39, 5%) reported blinding strategies. Use of validated questionnaires was reported in 28% (11/39) of studies. In terms of reporting in published studies 15/26 (58%) did not report age at transfer, and 6/26 (23%) did not report the time of collection of each outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Few evaluative studies exist and their level of methodological quality is variable. The complexity of interventions, multiplicity of outcomes, difficulty of blinding and the small groups of patients have consequences on concluding on the effectiveness of interventions. The evaluation of the transition interventions requires an appropriate and common methodology which will provide access to a better level of evidence. We identified areas for improvement in terms of randomisation, recruitment and external validity, blinding, measurement validity, standardised assessment and reporting. Improvements will increase our capacity to determine effective interventions for transition care. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-01-27 /pmc/articles/PMC5278245/ /pubmed/28131998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012338 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Research Methods
Le Roux, E
Mellerio, H
Guilmin-Crépon, S
Gottot, S
Jacquin, P
Boulkedid, R
Alberti, C
Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
title Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
title_full Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
title_fullStr Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
title_short Methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
title_sort methodology used in comparative studies assessing programmes of transition from paediatrics to adult care programmes: a systematic review
topic Research Methods
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5278245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28131998
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012338
work_keys_str_mv AT lerouxe methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview
AT mellerioh methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview
AT guilmincrepons methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview
AT gottots methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview
AT jacquinp methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview
AT boulkedidr methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview
AT albertic methodologyusedincomparativestudiesassessingprogrammesoftransitionfrompaediatricstoadultcareprogrammesasystematicreview