Papers

Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice

^a Department of Medicine and Epidemiology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, ^b Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Western Ontario, ^c Department of Medicine, University of Western Ontario

Correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr Jeffrey Mahon, Room 60F-11, University Hospital, PO Box 5339, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5A5.

Abstract

Objective: To compare outcomes between groups of patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation given theophylline by n of 1 trials or standard practice.
Design: Randomised controlled study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice.
Setting: Tertiary care centre outpatient department.
Subjects: 31 patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation who were unsure that theophylline was helpful after an open trial.
Interventions: n Of 1 trials (single patient randomised multiple crossover comparisons of theophylline against placebo) followed published guidelines. For standard practice patients theophylline was stopped and resumed if their dyspnoea worsened; if their dyspnoea then improved theophylline was continued. For both groups a decision to continue or stop the drug was made within three months of randomisation.
Main outcome measures: Exercise capacity as measured by six minute walking distance, quality of life as measured by the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire at baseline and six months after randomisation, and proportions of patients taking theophylline at six months.
Results: 26 patients completed follow up. 47% fewer n of 1 trial patients than standard practice patients were taking theophylline at six months (5/14 versus 10/12; 95% confidence interval of difference 14% to 80%) without differences in exercise capacity or quality of life.
Conclusions: n Of 1 trials led to less theophylline use without adverse effects on exercise capacity or quality of life in patients with irreversible chronic airflow limitation. These data directly support the presence of a clinically important bias towards unnecessary treatment during open prescription of theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation. Confirmation in a larger study and similar studies for other problems appropriate for n of 1 trials are needed before widespread use of n of 1 trials can be advocated in routine clinical practice.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome

Gunn Elisabeth Vist, Kåre Birger Hagen, P J Devereaux, Dianne Bryant, Doris Tove Kristoffersen, and Andrew David Oxman
BMJ 2005 330: 1175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Nikles, C. J., Mitchell, G. K., Del Mar, C. B., Clavarino, A., McNairn, N. (2006). An n-of-1 trial service in clinical practice: testing the effectiveness of stimulants for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.. Pediatrics 117: 2040-2046 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Lee, A., Cheng, F. F. K., St Leger, L. (2005). Evaluating health-promoting schools in Hong Kong: development of a framework. HEALTH PROMOT INT 20: 177-186 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Vist, G. E., Hagen, K. B., Devereaux, P J, Bryant, D., Kristoffersen, D. T., Oxman, A. D. (2005). Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome. BMJ 330: 1175- [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Decramer, M, Gosselink, R, Rutten-Van Molken, M, Buffels, J, Van Schayck, O, Gevenois, P-A, Pellegrino, R, Derom, E, De Backer, W (2005). Assessment of progression of COPD: report of a workshop held in Leuven, 11-12 March 2004. Thorax 60: 335-342 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Wegman, A., van der Windt, D., Bongers, M, Twisk, J., Stalman, W., de Vries, T. (2005). Efficacy of temazepam in frequent users: a series of N-of-1 trials. Fam Pract 22: 152-159 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Sherman, E. J., Rubin, D. M., Venkatraman, E., Schwartz, G. K., Miller, V. A., Radzyner, M. H., Ruchlin, H. S., Spriggs, D., Pfister, D. G. (2004). Using Patients As Their Own Controls for Cost Evaluation of Phase I Clinical Trials. JCO 22: 1308-1314 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Smyth, R L (2004). Intravenous immunoglobulin for cystic fibrosis lung disease. Arch. Dis. Child. 89: 298-299 [Full text]  
• Curtis, J.R., Patrick, D.L. (2003). The assessment of health status among patients with COPD. Eur Respir J 21: 36S-45s [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Guyatt, G. H., Haynes, R. B., Jaeschke, R. Z., Cook, D. J., Green, L., Naylor, C. D., Wilson, M. C., Richardson, W. S., for the Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group, (2000). Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: XXV. Evidence-Based Medicine: Principles for Applying the Users' Guides to Patient Care. JAMA 284: 1290-1296 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Hackner, D., Tu, G., Weingarten, S., Mohsenifar, Z. (1999). Guidelines in Pulmonary Medicine: A 25-Year Profile. Chest 116: 1046-1062 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Guyatt, G. (1999). A 75-Year-Old Man With Congestive Heart Failure. JAMA 281: 2321-2328 [Full text]  
• Mahon, J. L., Laupacis, A., Hodder, R. V., McKim, D. A., Paterson, N. A. M., Wood, T. E., Donner, A. (1999). Theophylline for Irreversible Chronic Airflow Limitation: A Randomized Study Comparing n of 1 Trials to Standard Practice. Chest 115: 38-48 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Sheldon, T. A, Guyatt, G. H, Haines, A. (1998). Getting research findings into practice: When to act on the evidence. BMJ 317: 139-142 [Full text]  
• (1998). Randomised controlled trials in single patients. DTB 36: 40-40 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Porta, M., Bolumar, F., Hernandez, I., Vioque, J. (1996). N of 1 trials. BMJ 313: 427b-427 [Full text]  
• (1996). ``N-of-1'' Trials Make a Difference. Journal Watch Cardiology 1996: 19-19 [Full text]  
• (1996). ""N-OF-1"" TRIALS MAKE A DIFFERENCE. JWatch General 1996: 1-1 [Full text]