Multicenter, randomized, controlled trials evaluating mortality in intensive care: Doomed to fail?
- 1 April 2008
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Critical Care Medicine
- Vol. 36 (4) , 1311-1322
- https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0b013e318168ea3e
Abstract
To determine how many multicenter, randomized controlled trials have been published that assess mortality as a primary outcome in the adult intensive care unit population, and to evaluate their methodologic quality. A sensitive search strategy for randomized controlled trials was conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and in MedLine using the PubMed interface. All publications of adult, multicenter randomized controlled trials carried out in the intensive care unit, with mortality as a primary outcome, and including >50 patients were selected. Seventy-two randomized controlled trials were retrieved and were classified according to their effect on mortality: beneficial, detrimental, or neutral. Ten of the studies reported a positive impact of the studied intervention on mortality, seven studies reported a detrimental effect of the intervention, and 55 studies showed no effect on mortality. This literature search demonstrates that relatively few of the randomized controlled trials conducted in intensive care units and using mortality as a primary outcome show a beneficial impact of the intervention on the survival of critically ill patients. Methodological limitations of some of the randomized controlled trials may have prevented positive results. Other forms of evidence and end points other than mortality need to be considered when evaluating interventions in critically ill patients.Keywords
This publication has 97 references indexed in Scilit:
- Pulmonary-Artery versus Central Venous Catheter to Guide Treatment of Acute Lung InjuryNew England Journal of Medicine, 2006
- Drotrecogin Alfa (Activated) for Adults with Severe Sepsis and a Low Risk of DeathNew England Journal of Medicine, 2005
- Evidence based medicine: does it make a difference?BMJ, 2005
- Evidence-Based Medicine in the ICUChest, 2004
- Early Use of the Pulmonary Artery Catheter and Outcomes in Patients With Shock and Acute Respiratory Distress SyndromeA Randomized Controlled TrialJAMA, 2003
- A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Use of Pulmonary-Artery Catheters in High-Risk Surgical PatientsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- Doctors' perceptions of the effects of interventions tested in prospective, randomised, controlled, clinical trials: results of a survey of ICU physiciansIntensive Care Medicine, 2001
- Which therapeutic interventions in critical care medicine have been shown to reduce mortality in prospective, randomized, clinical trials? A survey of candidates for the Belgian Board Examination in Intensive Care MedicineCritical Care Medicine, 2000
- Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn'tBMJ, 1996
- A Controlled Clinical Trial of High-Dose Methylprednisolone in the Treatment of Severe Sepsis and Septic ShockNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987