Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Intensive Care Medicine 5/2019

Open Access 01-05-2019 | What's New in Intensive Care

Adaptive designs in clinical trials in critically ill patients: principles, advantages and pitfalls

Authors: C. H. van Werkhoven, S. Harbarth, M. J. M. Bonten

Published in: Intensive Care Medicine | Issue 5/2019

Login to get access

Excerpt

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for a comparative evaluation of interventions. Their robust design helps prevent different biases, most importantly confounding by indication. However, RCTs often require large numbers of patients, and even then many appear to be underpowered—and thus inconclusive—due to misspecification of original assumptions used for sample size calculation [1, 2]. Furthermore, especially in critically ill patients, it is difficult to acquire informed consent for interventions that need to start immediately, such as treatment of infections. This may result in selected populations, reducing the generalisability of study findings [3]. Adaptive trials are trials that include decision rules to change key trial design elements during the RCT. The promise of adaptive trials is to provide answers to therapeutic research questions as efficiently as possible without compromising reliability. They can be designed such that a conclusive answer is always reached and that—during the course of the study—the proportion of patients receiving the most promising treatment increases [4]. This benefit for individual patients may overcome ethical barriers to apply deferred or waived consent for randomisation, and thereby increase generalisability of the results. In this viewpoint we aim to elucidate principles, advantages and pitfalls of adaptive trials. …
Literature
5.
6.
go back to reference McCloskey RV, Straube RC, Sanders C et al (1994) Treatment of septic shock with human monoclonal antibody HA-1A. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. CHESS Trial Study Group. Ann Intern Med 121:1–5CrossRefPubMed McCloskey RV, Straube RC, Sanders C et al (1994) Treatment of septic shock with human monoclonal antibody HA-1A. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. CHESS Trial Study Group. Ann Intern Med 121:1–5CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference van Nieuwenhoven CA, Vandenbroucke-Grauls C, van Tiel FH et al (2006) Feasibility and effects of the semirecumbent position to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomized study. Crit Care Med 34:396–402CrossRefPubMed van Nieuwenhoven CA, Vandenbroucke-Grauls C, van Tiel FH et al (2006) Feasibility and effects of the semirecumbent position to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomized study. Crit Care Med 34:396–402CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Adaptive designs in clinical trials in critically ill patients: principles, advantages and pitfalls
Authors
C. H. van Werkhoven
S. Harbarth
M. J. M. Bonten
Publication date
01-05-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine / Issue 5/2019
Print ISSN: 0342-4642
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-018-5426-z

Other articles of this Issue 5/2019

Intensive Care Medicine 5/2019 Go to the issue