Cargando…

How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines

OBJECTIVES: “Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016” provides guidelines in regard to prompt management and resuscitation of sepsis or septic shock. The study is aimed to assess the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Choupoo, Nang S, Das, Saurabh K, Saikia, Priyam, Dey, Samarjit, Ray, Sumit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34316171
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895
_version_ 1783723715740041216
author Choupoo, Nang S
Das, Saurabh K
Saikia, Priyam
Dey, Samarjit
Ray, Sumit
author_facet Choupoo, Nang S
Das, Saurabh K
Saikia, Priyam
Dey, Samarjit
Ray, Sumit
author_sort Choupoo, Nang S
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: “Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016” provides guidelines in regard to prompt management and resuscitation of sepsis or septic shock. The study is aimed to assess the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that formulate these guidelines in terms of fragility index and reverse fragility index. METHOD: RCTs that contributed to these guidelines having parallel two-group design, 1:1 allocation ratio, and at least one dichotomous outcome were included in the study. The median fragility index was calculated for RCTs with significant statistical outcomes, whereas the median reverse fragility index was calculated for RCTs with nonsignificant statistical results. RESULTS: Hundred RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The median fragility index was 5.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1–30] and median reverse fragility index was 13 (95% CI 12.07–16.8) at a p value of 0.05. The median reverse fragility index was 16 (95% CI 10–26) at a p value of 0.01. Most of the RCTs included in this analysis were of good quality, having a median Jadad score of 6. CONCLUSION: This analysis found that the surviving sepsis guidelines were based on highly robust RCTs with statistically insignificant results and on some moderately robust RCTs with statistically significant results. RCTs with statistically insignificant results were more robust than RCTs with statistically significant results in regard to these guidelines. HIGHLIGHTS: The study assessed the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were used to formulate surviving sepsis guidelines. Most RCTs showed statistically nonsignificant results. RCTs with statistically significant results were moderately fragile whereas RCTs with nonsignificant results were more robust. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Choupoo NS, Das SK, Saikia P, Dey S, Ray S. How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(7):773–779.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8286372
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82863722021-07-26 How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines Choupoo, Nang S Das, Saurabh K Saikia, Priyam Dey, Samarjit Ray, Sumit Indian J Crit Care Med Original Article OBJECTIVES: “Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016” provides guidelines in regard to prompt management and resuscitation of sepsis or septic shock. The study is aimed to assess the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that formulate these guidelines in terms of fragility index and reverse fragility index. METHOD: RCTs that contributed to these guidelines having parallel two-group design, 1:1 allocation ratio, and at least one dichotomous outcome were included in the study. The median fragility index was calculated for RCTs with significant statistical outcomes, whereas the median reverse fragility index was calculated for RCTs with nonsignificant statistical results. RESULTS: Hundred RCTs that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The median fragility index was 5.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1–30] and median reverse fragility index was 13 (95% CI 12.07–16.8) at a p value of 0.05. The median reverse fragility index was 16 (95% CI 10–26) at a p value of 0.01. Most of the RCTs included in this analysis were of good quality, having a median Jadad score of 6. CONCLUSION: This analysis found that the surviving sepsis guidelines were based on highly robust RCTs with statistically insignificant results and on some moderately robust RCTs with statistically significant results. RCTs with statistically insignificant results were more robust than RCTs with statistically significant results in regard to these guidelines. HIGHLIGHTS: The study assessed the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were used to formulate surviving sepsis guidelines. Most RCTs showed statistically nonsignificant results. RCTs with statistically significant results were moderately fragile whereas RCTs with nonsignificant results were more robust. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Choupoo NS, Das SK, Saikia P, Dey S, Ray S. How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines. Indian J Crit Care Med 2021;25(7):773–779. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8286372/ /pubmed/34316171 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895 Text en Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers. 2021 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Article
Choupoo, Nang S
Das, Saurabh K
Saikia, Priyam
Dey, Samarjit
Ray, Sumit
How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
title How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
title_full How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
title_fullStr How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
title_full_unstemmed How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
title_short How Robust are the Evidences that Formulate Surviving Sepsis Guidelines? An Analysis of Fragility and Reverse Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials that were Referred in these Guidelines
title_sort how robust are the evidences that formulate surviving sepsis guidelines? an analysis of fragility and reverse fragility of randomized controlled trials that were referred in these guidelines
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8286372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34316171
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-23895
work_keys_str_mv AT choupoonangs howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines
AT dassaurabhk howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines
AT saikiapriyam howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines
AT deysamarjit howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines
AT raysumit howrobustaretheevidencesthatformulatesurvivingsepsisguidelinesananalysisoffragilityandreversefragilityofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsthatwerereferredintheseguidelines