Please sit beside someone from whom you would like help in solving a problem related to practicing evidence-based health care

Joint 7th International Shared Decision Making (ISDM) Conference

and the 4th International Society for Evidence-Based Health Care (ISEHC) Conference 2015

To register your interest in attending, sponsoring, exhibiting or presenting at the conference visit:

www.isdm-isehc2015.org

How To Practice and TeachEvidence Based Health Care:An Attempt at a Tantalizing

Introduction to the Workshop

Gordon Guyatt

PlanPlan• EBHC EBHC

– know best evidence – staying updatedknow best evidence – staying updated– process of answering clinical questionsprocess of answering clinical questions

• introduce a patientintroduce a patient– apply processapply process

• review an EBM principlereview an EBM principle

• demonstrate I’m with itdemonstrate I’m with it

EBHC - Know best evidenceEBHC - Know best evidence

• staying up to datestaying up to date– journals journals – secondary journalssecondary journals– push services push services

• solving a clinical dilemmasolving a clinical dilemma

Evidence Arc

Apply

Appraise

Acquire

Ask

Patient

Act

Patient

Background to our patientBackground to our patient

• Type 2 diabetes epidemicType 2 diabetes epidemic

• occurs in older, often obese and occurs in older, often obese and sedentary individualssedentary individuals

• associated with macrovascular (MI, CV associated with macrovascular (MI, CV death, stroke) and microvascular death, stroke) and microvascular (neuropathy, retinopathy, nephropathy) (neuropathy, retinopathy, nephropathy) complicationscomplications

• diagnosis by fasting glucose (> 125 diagnosis by fasting glucose (> 125 mg/dl, 7 mm/l), GTT, increasingly HbA1Cmg/dl, 7 mm/l), GTT, increasingly HbA1C

Our patientOur patient’’s presentations presentation

• 57 year old man, + family history of 57 year old man, + family history of CV disease, doesnCV disease, doesn’’t smoke, moderate t smoke, moderate regular exercise, not obese, balanced regular exercise, not obese, balanced dietdiet

• routine testing shows no routine testing shows no hypertension, lipid profile normal, FBG hypertension, lipid profile normal, FBG 117/6.5117/6.5

Evidence Arc

Apply

Appraise

Acquire

Ask

Patient

Act

Patient

any questions about patient management?

Our patientOur patient’’s presentations presentation

• 57 year old man, + family history of 57 year old man, + family history of CV disease, doesnCV disease, doesn’’t smoke, moderate t smoke, moderate regular exercise, not obese, balanced regular exercise, not obese, balanced dietdiet

• routine testing shows no routine testing shows no hypertension, lipid profile normal, FBG hypertension, lipid profile normal, FBG 117/6.5117/6.5

QuestionQuestion

• patientpatient– middle-aged man with borderline sugarmiddle-aged man with borderline sugar

• interventionintervention– rosiglitazonerosiglitazone

• comparatorcomparator– no rosiglitazoneno rosiglitazone

• outcome?outcome?

Evidence Arc

Apply

Appraise

Acquire: what sort

of study and

source?

Ask

Patient

Act

Patient

DREAM

Warning: You will be asked to summarize

oral GTTfasting glucose > 6.1, < 7.0 mmol/l2 hr > 7.8, < 11.1

> 80% meds takenover 17 days

all participants receivedhealthy diet and lifestyle advice

Evidence Arc

Apply

Appraise - risk of bias, results

Acquire

Ask

Patient

Act

Patient

Validity (likelihood of bias)Validity (likelihood of bias)• randomizationrandomization

– concealedconcealed

• blindingblinding– patientspatients– caregiverscaregivers– data collectorsdata collectors– adjudicatorsadjudicators– data analystsdata analysts

• loss to follow-uploss to follow-up

Validity (likelihood of bias)Validity (likelihood of bias)• randomizationrandomization

– concealedconcealed

• blindingblinding– patientspatients– caregiverscaregivers– data collectorsdata collectors– adjudicatorsadjudicators– data analystsdata analysts

• loss to follow-uploss to follow-up

Validity (likelihood of bias)Validity (likelihood of bias)• randomizationrandomization

– concealedconcealed

• blindingblinding– patientspatients– caregiverscaregivers– data collectorsdata collectors– adjudicatorsadjudicators– data analystsdata analysts

• loss to follow-uploss to follow-up

Validity – risk of biasValidity – risk of bias

hopeless perfect

0 100

AssignmentAssignment

• using evidence in practiceusing evidence in practice– 30 second teaching opportunity30 second teaching opportunity

• issue of whether to give rosiglitazone to issue of whether to give rosiglitazone to patient arises in outpatient clinicpatient arises in outpatient clinic

• summarize the studysummarize the study

• educational goalseducational goals– remind resident of risk of bias criteriaremind resident of risk of bias criteria– summarize results using approximate numberssummarize results using approximate numbers

• include notion of confidence intervalsinclude notion of confidence intervals

– applicability to our patientapplicability to our patient

An Indispensable Skill:An Indispensable Skill:Study SynopsisStudy Synopsis

The Problem:The Problem:• immediately after reading an article few immediately after reading an article few

learners can provide a synopsis.learners can provide a synopsis.• several days after reading an article, hardly any several days after reading an article, hardly any

clinicians can do this.clinicians can do this.• some EBM teachers cansome EBM teachers can’’t do this either.t do this either.

The Solution:The Solution:• clinicians and teachers need to practice clinicians and teachers need to practice

creating the verbal study synopsis of an article.creating the verbal study synopsis of an article.

What is the authors’ message?

• rosiglitazone to prevent diabetes:

• strong indication (for all)

• weak indication (for some)

• not indicated

Doctor, what do I gain by Doctor, what do I gain by taking rosiglitazone?taking rosiglitazone?

• Doc: less chance of diabetesDoc: less chance of diabetes

• Pt: what happens if I get diabetesPt: what happens if I get diabetes

• Doc: you have to take a drugDoc: you have to take a drug

• Pt: the same drug IPt: the same drug I’’m taking to prevent diabetes?m taking to prevent diabetes?

• Doc: I could give you a drug with less problemsDoc: I could give you a drug with less problems

• Pt: IPt: I’’ll take a drug every day for 3 years to lower my ll take a drug every day for 3 years to lower my risk of taking the same or a less toxic drug from 25 risk of taking the same or a less toxic drug from 25 to 10%???to 10%???

Modelling exerciseModelling exercise

• 10,000 patients with pre-diabetes10,000 patients with pre-diabetes

• what would happen if:what would happen if:– lifestyle advice only, drugs when they lifestyle advice only, drugs when they

develop diabetesdevelop diabetes– rosiglitazone for 3 years, stop, rosiglitazone for 3 years, stop,

resume drug if develop diabetesresume drug if develop diabetes

drug no drug difference

diabetes medication 3 years 30000 3650 26350

new diagnosis of diabetes 1060 2500HR 0.38 (CI, 0.33-

0.44)

Anxiety about diabetes ?? ?? ??

Costs inconvenience self-monitoring ?? ?? ??

Costs and inconvenience HbA1c, lipoprotein testing, retinal exam, etc.

?? ?? ??

MI, stroke, CV death at 3 years 120 90HR 1.39 (CI 0.81-

2.37)

Heart failure, at 3 years 50 10 HR 7.03 (CI 1.6-30.9)

kidney, eyes, neuropathy ?? ?? ??

Peripheral edema, at 3 years 680 490 RR 1.4 (CI 1.1-1.8)

Weight gain (kg), at 3 years + 1.1 -1.1 + 2.2

Rare (fractures, macular edema) ?? ?? ??

What is your view?

• rosiglitazone to prevent diabetes:

• strong indication (for all)

• weak indication (for some)

• not indicated

• investigators very smart people– what has gone wrong here?

What went wrong?

• development of diabetes is a surrogate

• surrogate for:– mortality– cardiovascualar events (stroke, MI)– renal failure– visual impairment and blindness– anxiety– inconvenience

Patient-important and Patient-important and surrogtessurrogtes

• patient important outcomespatient important outcomes

• surrogate outcomessurrogate outcomes– associated with patient-importantassociated with patient-important– change in surrogate leads to change in pt-importantchange in surrogate leads to change in pt-important

• often biologically compellingoften biologically compelling– association suggests causal relationshipassociation suggests causal relationship

• often practically compellingoften practically compelling– markedly markedly ↓ ↓ duration, sample size, cost of RCTsduration, sample size, cost of RCTs

• often misleadingoften misleading

Surrogate or patient-important?Surrogate or patient-important?• blood pressure blood pressure

– (stroke, MI, death)(stroke, MI, death)• heart failure exacerbationheart failure exacerbation• cardiac output cardiac output

– (qol, exacerbations, death)(qol, exacerbations, death)• hip fracturehip fracture• vertebral fracture vertebral fracture

– (pain, deformity)(pain, deformity)• development/increase in development/increase in

albuminuria albuminuria – (dialysis)(dialysis)

• asymptomatic DVT asymptomatic DVT – (symptomatic DVT, PE) (symptomatic DVT, PE)

• development of diabetes development of diabetes

Conclusion

• beware surrogate outcomes

• if intervention harmless, no cost, can rely on surrogate

• if intervention has harms or costs, demand evidence of effect on patient-important outcomes

Suggestions for the course

• clarify your learning objectives

• take responsibility for ensuring objectives met

• have an awesome time