Joan MV Pons – Pàgina 4

Post d’estiu sobre el congrés internacional Preventing Overdiagnosis

12 ag.

Reduir les situacions de sobrediagnòstic i de sobretractament per millorar la pràctica clínica és el tema del congrés Preventing Overdiagnosis.

Tal com ha dit Ray Moynihan en el blog Cochrane Community “for anyone who currently doesn’t have overdiagnosis and overtreatment on their radar, it might be time you did”.

El congrés Preventing Overdiagnosis d’enguany ve carregat de temes controvertits i ha registrat un augment d’un 30% en el nombre de resums presentats.

Les participacions dels professionals de Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS) en aquest congrés les podem trobar des de la conferència inaugural fins a la participació en diverses taules rodones, ponències, comunicacions orals i pòsters.

Col·laboracions AQuAS en l’agenda del Preventing Overdiagnosis de 2016:

PRIMER DIA: Dimarts 20 de setembre de 2016

08:45-09:00. Dedeu T. Introduction. [conferència inaugural]

10.30-11.00 Room 131. García-Altés A. Overuse and Economic consequences of overdiagnosis. [chair]

10.30-11.00 Room 134. Marinelli M. Análisis de coste efectividad y de los daños causados por sobrediagnósticos de un programa de cribado de aneurismos de aorta abdominal.

12.40-13.30 Room 111/112 Colls C. Evaluation of the main factors related to hip fracture in people over 64

SEGON DIA: Dimecres 21 de setembre de 2016

12:15-12.45 Room 111/112 Vivanco RM. Dyslipidemia, statin use and lipid profile in epilepsy patients and general population: EPIVASMAR-REGICOR comparative study

12:45-13:30 Room 130. Pons JMV. Ageing and overdiagnosis, dediagnosis and deprescribing [Chair]

12:45-13:30 Room 130. Ageing and overdiagnosis, dediagnosis and deprescribing. Caro J. Impact of ESSENCIAL recommendations in primary care

15:30-17:15 Room 129. Widening disease definitions that cause overdiagnosis. Colls C. Actors and factors influencing treatment with drugs for attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

15:30-17:15 Room 130. Interventions to mitigate overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Obach M. QPI tool: an intervention in primary care to enhance prescription quality

TERCER DIA: Dijous 22 de setembre de 2016

09:00-10:30 Room 111/112. Moving from Evidence to Action. Almazan C. How to avoid unnecessary interventions in primary care.

11:00-12:30. Room 134. Marinelli M. Atlas de variaciones de la práctica clínica: ¿una herramienta para identificar posible sobre o infra-tratamiento? El caso de las artroplastias en Catalunya.

12:30-13:30 Room 111/112. Caro J. Drivers for low-value practices in primary care setting: a qualitative study

***

Podeu accedir al programa sencer del congrés i seguir el hashtag del congrès a Twitter: #PODC2016.

Si sou de vacances, des del blog AQUAS us desitgem unes bones vacances.

vacances2016

Ioannidis and the industry: a persistent distortion

7 abr.

John PA Ioannidis is a scientist and professor originally from Greece, currently working at Stanford (Meta-research Innovation Center – METRICS) who is, undoubtedly, among the most prolific authors of medical scientific literature.

Some of his papers, alone or in collaboration, have had a great impact. Who does not remember the one entitled “Why most published research findings are false?”. Nowhere in his large output will you find trivialities, and he recently came to Barcelona to speak about defective research and even about the waste of resources this implies. But we will leave the latter topic for another occasion.

The paper by this author I want to comment on is the one written in collaboration entitled “Undue industry influences that distort healthcare research, strategy, expenditure and practice: a review” published in 2013 in European Journal of Clinical Investigation.

One might think that all has been already said about the (bad) influence of drug and health care products industries. There is even a literary body or genre in biomedical scientific publications exclusively devoted to this topic. And books abound, too. All that could be said has been said. Well, actually it hasn’t. Undue influence, such as biases, is far more subtle than we think. It is often hard to tell how, similarly to interest conflicts in biomedical research or in prescription practices, the one who does it refuses any influence, since science could not admit it, as its own deontology doesn’t. Fools!

What is interesting about this paper is its review nature, not only for the number of papers gathered, but because it provides a more integrated (re)view of the different elements upon which industry acts, or is allowed to act. It should be noted that the interests and profit of the drug and health care products industry are quite legitimate, but it clearly shows some specifics that put it aside from other manufacturing industries, and not just because its important investment in R+D+i. It is believed to be one of the most profitable industries, possibly due to its large margins, but also because human diseases and ailments are here to stay, even though their end –which both the poor and the rich want to delay– is ultimately inescapable.

Ever since I learned it, I am very fond of a quotation by George W Merck (1894-1957) who for 25 years chaired the drug company that bears his family’s name (1925-1950). As this visionary man said: “We try to remember that medicine is for the patient. We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow, and if we have remembered that, they have never failed to appear. The better we have remembered it, the larger they have been.“ I wonder what he would think of it now.

Coming back to Ioannidis and his paper, there he follows the outline of how this (bad) influence acts, and the main elements –which changed with time– upon which it exerts its distorting effect, although not as an exclusive factor. Governments, as with other industries also regulated by them, play an essential role.

Evidence based medicine - Clinical practice guidelines - Medical practice

Post written by Joan MV Pons.

Animal (non-human) testing

18 febr.

It is striking that there are more data on the animals used in experimentation than on humans (patients or not) who take part in clinical trials. Certainly, in both cases, the regulations are stern and there are different organisms which ensure the safety of participants in experimentation.

Recently data on the experimental use of animals in Spain were published. Overall, the number of applications has been over 808,827 throughout 2014: 526,553 rodents (mostly mice), about 190,354 fish (more than a third were zebrafish) 44,169 birds and 23,881 rabbits, to name the most used animal species. It should be noted that a quarter of those, and despite being mostly mice, are genetically modified animals. The vast majority (75%) are used for what is called basic research and translational and applied research.

Informes anuales de la utilización de animales en la investigación y docencia

Is this too many or too few? What are the latest trends? Despite recent changes in the way we collect information, data show an increase over previous years, which does not seem to quite support the principles that should inspire animal testing, which were collected by the Royal Decree 53/2013, the so-called 3 Rs replacement, reduction and refinement.

Aside from quantity, quality also is important and there is a remarkable lag in initiatives to improve data collection and reviews of experimental studies compared to human clinical research. We are referring to the CAMARADES (Collaborative approach to Meta-analysis and Review of Data in Experimental animal Estudies), which is essential before starting a new study, and the ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting In-Vivo Experiments) to improve the design and publication of animal experimentation, and ultimately, to reduce the risk of biases.

One might wonder, how many biomedical research funding agencies, in their peer review process, call or require the use of these guidelines when assessing projects involving animal experimentation? Surely we could also discuss the implementation of the guidelines CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) in the case of clinical trials in humans.

It seems clear that the higher the risk of bias, the more overestimation of effects, thus it is not surprising that the subsequent proposals for translating this into human experimentation end up being disappointing.

The field of neuroscience is full of such cases of failed transfer, usually for involving imperfect animal models, or less than careful study designs and too prone to bias.

A recent paper by Malcolm R. Macleod from the Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, published in PLoS Biology, insisted on those qualitative aspects often found in animal research. It also underlined that reporting the risk of bias is not related to the journal’s impact factor, which again emphasizes this measure as a poor indicator of the quality of research.

Post written by Joan MV Pons.

The Great Escape

21 gen.

Joan MV Pons, Head of Evaluation AQuAS — Joan MV Pons

A few days ago, Anna Garcia-Altés in a previous post referred to the Nobel Prize in Economics, which Alfred Nobel never granted – that was awarded in 2015 to Angus Deaton and his work on inequality. This is not the subject that I wish to talk about today but another that also features in the recent book from this Nobel proze winner which is titled “The Great Escape” (The Great Escape). Yes, just like the movie, set in a German camp for prisoners of war starring Steve McQueen and recalling a real fact of World War II. Unlike reality, the book predicts a better ending. For Deaton, the greatest escape in human history was in overcoming poverty and ageing.

For centuries, those who did not die at a young age could face years of misery. Beginning in period called the Enlightenment, with its scientific revolution and subsequent later industrial revolution, some people in certain countries began to escape this meagre fate.

Meanwhile, germ theories founded in the late nineteenth century surpassed the paradigm of the miasma theory in explaining contagious diseases. The key was and still is scientific knowledge and its dissemination. This point in history marks the extraordinary increase in life expectancy, initially for the better-off and then for the rest of the population.

This higher life expectancy, manifested especially in the developed countries, is largely due to the remarkable reduction in infant mortality and, more recently, to the epidemiological transition to chronic non-contagious diseases, the improvement in life expectancy in adulthood (increased life expectancy ≥ 50 years from 1950), but without a substantial improvement in longevity. Deaton shows us all this with data and graphics.

To illustrate it, Deaton mentions the progress in combating smallpox with a vaccination of smallpox (initially using matter from infected people and later the much safer vaccine Edward Jenner introduced in 1799). The public health measures introduced in the last few hundred years, including sanitation, water supply, nutrition and better hygiene, have led to a significant reduction in infant mortality.

Here, it was due to not only the knowledge but also the determination of the authorities in improving the conditions of the population. The improvement in life expectancy in adulthood is explained largely by reducing cardiovascular mortality through diagnostic and therapeutic advances in this field.

As mentioned before, we witnessed not only increased life expectancy but also a significant increase in the world population, an authentic explosion starting in the second half of the twentieth century. Malthusian alarms re-emerged but they were fortunately overcome by improvements in agricultural productivity, without excluding initiatives – for better or worse – for controlling the birth rate in developing countries; again, examples of scientific knowledge and its dissemination.

Deaton is very critical about the operating methods in which help flows from developed countries to developing countries. From the times of imperialism and colonization where (natural) resources were moved from poor countries to rich ones (Nineteenth century) and since the end of World War II we’ve also seen a flow of resources from developed countries to developing countries.

This external help, whether from governmental or NGO sources and despite the illusion that might it create if it continues as usual, may end up doing more harm than good. There’s no shortage of examples in the book of wasted resources by governments and corrupt politicians, granting donations or grants to countries (government to government) without these ever reaching the people. Not to mention situations where these grants are part of the geopolitics of the former colonies or contemporary powers.

Contrary to what an engineered hydraulic vision (communicating vessels) may show, we must invest in projects and programs that promote conditions for economic development to make external aid unnecessary, as is the reality in Africa, where paradoxically, the more external help yields the least growth in GDP per capita.

Health aid, without underestimating its achievements (vaccination campaigns, infrastructure construction, drugs against HIV / AIDS, mosquito nets), continues to be in most cases, vertical health programs with a very specific focus. This contrasts with the horizontal programs aimed at strengthening local health care systems, especially a good network of primary and community care.

Often foreign aid and the development of local capacity are not aligned; on the contrary, often one damages the other. Rich countries’ subsidies to their agriculture – consider the famous European PAC – is detrimental to farmers in poor countries where most of the workforce still works the land. There are more effective ways to help.

(It notes that another Nobel laureate in economics, Robert Fogel (1926-2013), had already written about the great escape in “The Escape from Hunger and Premature Death, 1700-2100” (2004), Deaton and had revised appointment. Thank Anna Garcia-Altés to call me about this)