Skip navigation

A meta-review of evidence on heart failure disease management programs: the challenges of describing and synthesizing evidence on complex interventions

A meta-review of evidence on heart failure disease management programs: the challenges of describing and synthesizing evidence on complex interventions

Savard, Lori A., Thompson, David R. and Clark, Alexander M. (2011) A meta-review of evidence on heart failure disease management programs: the challenges of describing and synthesizing evidence on complex interventions. Trials, 12:194. ISSN 1745-6215 (doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-12-194)

[img]
Preview
PDF (Published article)
(ITEM_10435)_THOMPSON_2011_HEALTH.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.

Download (313kB)

Abstract

Background: Despite favourable results from past meta-analyses, some recent large trials have not found Heart Failure (HF) disease management programs to be beneficial. To explore reasons for this, we evaluated evidence from existing meta-analyses.

Methods: Systematic review incorporating meta-review was used. We selected meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials published after 1995 in English that examined the effects of HF disease management programs on key outcomes. Databases searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), DARE, NHS EED, NHS HTA, Ageline, AMED, Scopus, Web of Science and CINAHL; cited references, experts and existing reviews were also searched.

Results: 15 meta-analyses were identified containing a mean of 18.5 randomized trials of HF interventions +/- 10.1 (range: 6 to 36). Overall quality of the meta-analyses was very mixed (Mean AMSTAR Score = 6.4 +/- 1.9; range 2-9). Reporting inadequacies were widespread around populations, intervention components, settings and characteristics, comparison, and comparator groups. Heterogeneity (statistical, clinical, and methodological) was not taken into account sufficiently when drawing conclusions from pooled analyses.

Conclusions: Meta-analyses of heart failure disease management programs have promising findings but often fail to report key characteristics of populations, interventions, and comparisons. Existing reviews are of mixed quality and do not adequately take account of program complexity and heterogeneity.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: 1] Copyright: © 2011 Savard et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. [2] First published online: 16 August 2011.
Uncontrolled Keywords: heart failure disease management, intervention
Subjects: R Medicine > RT Nursing
Pre-2014 Departments: School of Health & Social Care > Department of Social Work & Health Development
Related URLs:
Last Modified: 25 Sep 2019 11:11
Selected for GREAT 2016: None
Selected for GREAT 2017: None
Selected for GREAT 2018: None
Selected for GREAT 2019: None
URI: http://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/10435

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics