Cargando…
Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review
OBJECTIVE: Assisted vaginal birth (AVB) is a complex intervention involving medical devices, comprising multiple components. This complexity creates difficulties when designing and conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs), in terms of describing, standardising and monitoring the intervention,...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier Scientific Publishers
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8250286/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34023718 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.05.026 |
_version_ | 1783717038218280960 |
---|---|
author | Hotton, Emily J. Renwick, Sophie Lenguerrand, Erik Wade, Julia Draycott, Tim J. Crofts, Joanna F. Blencowe, Natalie S. |
author_facet | Hotton, Emily J. Renwick, Sophie Lenguerrand, Erik Wade, Julia Draycott, Tim J. Crofts, Joanna F. Blencowe, Natalie S. |
author_sort | Hotton, Emily J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Assisted vaginal birth (AVB) is a complex intervention involving medical devices, comprising multiple components. This complexity creates difficulties when designing and conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs), in terms of describing, standardising and monitoring the intervention, and accounting for differing clinician expertise. This review examines the reporting standards of complex interventions involving a medical device, in the context of AVB RCTs. STUDY DESIGN: Searches were undertaken from the start of indexing to March 2021, and limited to RCTs, feasibility and pilot studies including at least one device for AVB. RCTs were selected if they included participants having an AVB with any device, with or without a comparator group. Reporting details were assessed according to the Consolidating Standards of Reporting Trials extension for non-pharmacological treatments (CONSORT-NPT), focusing on intervention descriptions, standardization, adherence and clinician expertise. Screening of abstracts, full-text articles and data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of 4098 abstracts and 83 full-text articles, 39 papers were included, investigating 80 interventions. Twenty-seven different named devices were identified. Intervention descriptions were provided in 20 (55%) papers with varying levels of detail and with only one covering the entire procedure. Standardization of interventions was mentioned in 25 papers (64%). Only eight (21%) papers reported any form of adherence to the intended procedure. Some data regarding expertise were reported in 25 (64%) papers. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some compliance with reporting standards, there is a lack of detail regarding intervention description, standardization, adherence and expertise in RCTs of AVB. This creates difficulties in understanding how intervention delivery was intended and what actually occurred. Clearer guidelines for the reporting of invasive procedures and devices are required. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8250286 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier Scientific Publishers |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82502862021-07-12 Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review Hotton, Emily J. Renwick, Sophie Lenguerrand, Erik Wade, Julia Draycott, Tim J. Crofts, Joanna F. Blencowe, Natalie S. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol Review Article OBJECTIVE: Assisted vaginal birth (AVB) is a complex intervention involving medical devices, comprising multiple components. This complexity creates difficulties when designing and conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs), in terms of describing, standardising and monitoring the intervention, and accounting for differing clinician expertise. This review examines the reporting standards of complex interventions involving a medical device, in the context of AVB RCTs. STUDY DESIGN: Searches were undertaken from the start of indexing to March 2021, and limited to RCTs, feasibility and pilot studies including at least one device for AVB. RCTs were selected if they included participants having an AVB with any device, with or without a comparator group. Reporting details were assessed according to the Consolidating Standards of Reporting Trials extension for non-pharmacological treatments (CONSORT-NPT), focusing on intervention descriptions, standardization, adherence and clinician expertise. Screening of abstracts, full-text articles and data extraction was performed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of 4098 abstracts and 83 full-text articles, 39 papers were included, investigating 80 interventions. Twenty-seven different named devices were identified. Intervention descriptions were provided in 20 (55%) papers with varying levels of detail and with only one covering the entire procedure. Standardization of interventions was mentioned in 25 papers (64%). Only eight (21%) papers reported any form of adherence to the intended procedure. Some data regarding expertise were reported in 25 (64%) papers. CONCLUSIONS: Despite some compliance with reporting standards, there is a lack of detail regarding intervention description, standardization, adherence and expertise in RCTs of AVB. This creates difficulties in understanding how intervention delivery was intended and what actually occurred. Clearer guidelines for the reporting of invasive procedures and devices are required. Elsevier Scientific Publishers 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8250286/ /pubmed/34023718 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.05.026 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Article Hotton, Emily J. Renwick, Sophie Lenguerrand, Erik Wade, Julia Draycott, Tim J. Crofts, Joanna F. Blencowe, Natalie S. Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review |
title | Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review |
title_full | Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review |
title_short | Exploring the reporting standards of RCTs involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: A systematic review |
title_sort | exploring the reporting standards of rcts involving invasive procedures for assisted vaginal birth: a systematic review |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8250286/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34023718 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.05.026 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hottonemilyj exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview AT renwicksophie exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview AT lenguerranderik exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview AT wadejulia exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview AT draycotttimj exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview AT croftsjoannaf exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview AT blencowenatalies exploringthereportingstandardsofrctsinvolvinginvasiveproceduresforassistedvaginalbirthasystematicreview |