Partially randomised patient preference trials as an alternative design to randomised controlled trials: systematic review and meta-analyses

Abstract

ObjectiveRandomised controlled trials (RCT) are the gold standard to provide unbiased data. However, when patients have a treatment preference, randomisation may influence participation and outcomes (eg, external and internal validity). The aim of this study was to assess the influence of patients’ preference in RCTs by analysing partially randomised patient preference trials (RPPT); an RCT and preference cohort combined.DesignSystematic review and meta-analyses.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRPPTs published between January 2005 and October 2018 reporting on allocation of patients to randomised and preference cohorts were included.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data. The main outcomes were the difference in external validity (participation and baseline characteristics) and internal validity (lost to follow-up, crossover and the primary outcome) between the randomised and the preference cohort within each RPPT, compared in a meta-regression using a Wald test. Risk of bias was not assessed, as no quality assessment for RPPTs has yet been developed.ResultsIn total, 117 of 3734 identified articles met screening criteria and 44 were eligible (24 873 patients). The participation rate in RPPTs was >95% in 14 trials (range: 48%–100%) and the randomisation refusal rate was >50% in 26 trials (range: 19%–99%). Higher education, female, older age, race and prior experience with one treatment arm were characteristics of patients declining randomisation. The lost to follow-up and cross-over rate were significantly higher in the randomised cohort compared with the preference cohort. Following the meta-analysis, the reported primary outcomes were comparable between both cohorts of the RPPTs, mean difference 0.093 (95% CI −0.178 to 0.364, p=0.502).ConclusionsPatients’ preference led to a substantial proportion of a specific patient group refusing randomisation, while it did not influence the primary outcome within an RPPT. Therefore, RPPTs could increase external validity without compromising the internal validity compared with RCTs.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019094438.

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the treatment of perianal fistulas in 20 patients with Crohn’s disease

“…However, a traditional RCT has several downsides when it comes to internal and external validity in fistula patients that often have a distinct preference for their treatment 26 . Given the specific nature of the hyperbaric oxygen treatment, a patient preference model or Trial within Cohorts (TwiCs) design might be more appropriate 31,32 . It might also be interesting to investigate different approaches using hyperbaric oxygen therapy, such as treatment of patients with new fistulas (instead of therapy‐refractory ones) or pre‐ and post‐operative treatment with hyperbaric oxygen therapy around definitive surgical closure.…”

Exercise for people living with frailty and receiving haemodialysis: a mixed-methods randomised controlled feasibility study

“…Taken together, these factors have implications for determining treatment effects and future intervention implementation. 49 There is increasing recognition that novel trial designs may be indicated when evaluating complex interventions and a Partially Randomised Patient Preference Trial, where participants without preference are randomised, while those with a preference receive their choice would provide information on both the efficacy of the intervention and the influence of preference. 49 50 …”

Methylprednisolone in adults hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia

“…The reason for including this preference arm was an attempt to avoid inclusion bias in the current setting in which many physicians feel glucocorticoids may have a beneficial effect in COVID-19 despite the absence of evidence from controlled clinical trials. The incorporation of patient and/or physician preferences is based on the well-described preference trial designs, which allows incorporation of patient preferences [ 24 , 25 ].…”