crp

4
HARM WORKSHEET Are the results of this haerm study valid? Citation: CELECOXIB VERSUS DICLOFENAC AND OMEPRAZOLE IN REDUCING THE RISK OF RECURRENT ULCER BLEEDING IN PATIENTS WITH ARTHRITIS Were there clearly defined groups of patients, similar in all important ways other than exposure to the treatment or other cause? Yes, (Study Design, 2105) Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either 200 mg of celecoxib (Celebrex, Pharmacia) twice daily plus omeprazole placebo daily or 75 mg of extended-release diclofenac (Voltaren XR, Novartis) twice daily plus 20 mg of omeprazole (Losec, AstraZeneca) daily for six months. Were treatments/ exposures and clinical outcomes measured in the same ways in both groups (was the assessment of outcomes either objective or blinded to exposure)? Yes,

Upload: elisa-mai-sarah

Post on 10-Dec-2015

214 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

CRP

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Crp

HARM WORKSHEET

Are the results of this haerm study valid?

Citation: CELECOXIB VERSUS DICLOFENAC AND OMEPRAZOLE IN REDUCING THE RISK OF RECURRENT ULCER BLEEDING IN PATIENTS WITH ARTHRITIS

Were there clearly defined groups of patients, similar in all important ways other than exposure to the treatment or other cause?

Yes, (Study Design, 2105)Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either 200 mg of celecoxib (Celebrex, Pharmacia) twice daily plus omeprazole placebo daily or 75 mg of extended-release diclofenac (Voltaren XR, Novartis) twice daily plus 20 mg of omeprazole (Losec, AstraZeneca) daily for six months.

Were treatments/ exposures and clinical outcomes measured in the same ways in both groups (was the assessment of outcomes either objective or blinded to exposure)?

Yes,

Page 2: Crp

Was the follow-up of study patients sufficiently long and complete?

Yes,

Do the results satisfy some “diagnostic tests for causation”?

Yes,

Is it clear that the exposure preceded the onset of the outcomes?

Yes,

Is there a dose-response gradients? Can’t tell

Is there positive evidence from a “dechallenge-rechallenge” study?Is the association consistent from study to study?Does the association make biological sense?

Page 3: Crp

Are the valid results from this harm study important?What is the magnitude of the association between the exposure and outcome?What is the precision of the estimate of the association between exposure and outcomes?

Adverse outcomes Totals

Present (case) Absent (control)

Exposed to the treatment

Yes(cohort)

a. 9 b. 134 a+b

No(cohort)

c. 7 d. 137 c+d

Totals a+c b+d a+b+c+d

Page 4: Crp

Should these valid, potentially important results change the treatmentof your patient?

Do the results apply to our patient? Yes,

Is our patient so different from those in the study that its results don’t apply?

No, our patient similiar to the patient in the study

What are out patient’s risks of the adverse event?

To calculate the NNH (number of patients we need to treat to harm one of them) for any oods ratio (OR) and our patient’s expected event rate for this adverse event if they were not exposed to this treatment (PEER):

Berapa orang yang diobati untuk menghasilkan 1 orang yang berisiko NNH = -69,9

What are our patient’s preferences, concerns and expectations from this treatment?

The treatment doesn’t move any adverse to the patient

What alternative treatments are available?