Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials

Developing Consensus-Based Priority Outcome Domains for Trials in Kidney Transplantation: A Multinational Delphi Survey With Patients, Caregivers, and Health Professionals

General Information

Abstract:
Background.
Inconsistencies in outcome reporting and frequent omission of patient-centered outcomes can diminish the value
of trials in treatment decision making. We identified critically important outcome domains in kidney transplantation based on the
shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals.

Methods.
In a 3-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers
and health professionals rated the importance of outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation on a 9-point Likert scale
and provided comments. During rounds 2 and 3, participants rerated the outcomes after reviewing their own score, the distribution
of the respondents' scores, and comments. We calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7 to 9 (critically important),
and analyzed comments thematically.

Results.
One thousand eighteen participants (461 [45%] patients/caregivers and 557
[55%] health professionals) from 79 countries completed round 1, and 779 (77%) completed round 3. The top 8 outcomes that
met the consensus criteria in round 3 (mean,
=
7.5; median,
=
8; proportion, >85%) in both groups were graft loss, graft function,
chronic rejection, acute rejection, mortality, infection, cancer (excluding skin), and cardiovascular disease. Compared with health
professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to 6 outcomes (mean difference of 0.5 or more): skin cancer, surgical com-
plications, cognition, blood pressure, depression, and ability to work. We identified 5 themes: capacity to control and inevitability,
personal relevance, debilitating repercussions, gaining awareness of risks, and addressing knowledge gaps.

Conclusions.
Graft complications and severe comorbidities were critically important for both stakeholder groups. These stakeholder-
prioritized outcomes will inform the core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of trials in kidney transplantation.

Authors:
Bénédicte Sautenet; Allison Tong; Karine E. Manera; Jeremy R. Chapman; Anthony N. Warrens; David Rosenbloom; Germaine Wong; John Gill; Klemens Budde; Lionel Rostaing; Lorna Marson; Michelle A. Josephson; Peter P. Reese; Timothy L. Pruett; Camilla S. Hanson; Donal O’Donoghue; Helen Tam-Tham; Jean-Michel Halimi; Jenny I. Shen; John Kanellis; John D. Scandling; Kirsten Howard; Martin Howell; Nick Cross; Nicole Evangelidis; Philip Masson; Rainer Oberbauer; Samuel Fung; Shilpa Jesudason; Simon Knight; Sreedhar Mandayam; Stephen P. McDonald; Steve Chadban; Tasleem Rajan; Jonathan C. Craig

Publication

Journal:
Transplantation
Volume:
Issue:
101
Pages:
1875 - 1886
Year:
2017
DOI:
Further Study Information

Date:
Funding source(s):

Health Area

Disease Category
Kidney disease

Disease Name
Kidney Transplant

Target Population

Age Range
18 - 71100

Sex
Either


Nature / type of Intervention
Surgery

Method(s)

Delphi process

Stakeholders Involved

Clinical experts
Consumers (caregivers)
Consumers (patients)
Policy makers
Regulatory agency representatives
Researchers

Study Type

Patient perspectives

The site uses cookies, some may have been set already. Please refer to our privacy policy & cookie usage statement.
If you continue to use the site we'll assume you're happy to accept the cookies.