logo

Heart Disease Telemonitoring Study

   

Added on  2020-07-22

15 Pages3900 Words79 Views
 | 
 | 
 | 
PART 3.1 APPRAISAL OF YOUR RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL (Please considerthe word limit for each question, 13 marks )Assessing the quality of the available evidence has also been a key focus this semester. Use theCASP tool for RCTs below to appraise the quality of your selected RCT. Section A: Are the results of the trial valid?Screening Questions 1. Did the trial address a clearly focused issue? Yes No Can’t tell Justify your answer:(Max 50 words)Yes, population through collect patients randomly then allocate the group of patientsfor intervention.The organisation prepare a postal questionnaires for patients the outcome ofexperiments is increase self care and adherences. In the self efficacy not anyimprovement. After that comparing the result to standards to find out reasons.
Heart Disease Telemonitoring Study_1

HINT: An issue can be ‘focused’ In terms of The population studied The intervention given The comparator given The outcomes considered 2. Was the assignment of patients to treatments randomised? (Max 50 Words)Yes No Can’t tell Justify your answer:Yes, the assessment of heart patients to treatments randomisedbecause there were randomly collect 382 heart patients then allocate197 persons of group for intervention. These experiments of allocation sequence is concealed in the form alsopatients did not had any knowledge about that.HINT: Consider How was this carried out? Was the allocation sequence concealed from 3. Were all of the patients who entered the trial properly accounted for at its conclusion?(Max 50 words) Yes No Can’t tell Justify your answer:These experiments are properly accounted that was not trial stoppedearly.There were divided heart patients in two groups after the experimentspatients analysed in the same group which they were randomised.HINT: Consider Was the trial stopped early? Were patients analysed in the groups to which they were randomised?4. Were patients, health workers and study personnel ‘blind’ to treatment? (Max 50 words) Yes No Can’t tell
Heart Disease Telemonitoring Study_2

Justify your answer:Yes, Heart patients, health workers and study personnel were blind to treatmentbecause through the organisation provide various treatments as experiments so theycould be blindly trust on that. Because they did not have any information and knowledge about new interventions.HINT: Think about Patients? Health workers? Study personnel? 5. Were the groups similar at the start of the trial? (Max 50 words)Yes No Can’t tell Justify your answer:Yes, there were group of persons are similar at the starting point of trial is collected 382persons in which 137 persons are allocated by intervention.Age of these persons approximately 75 and more than. In which 59% are male and 64%were lived with a partner.HINT: Look at Other factors that might affect the outcome such as age, sex, social classresearchers and patients?6. Aside from the experimental intervention were the groups treated equally? (Max 50words)Yes No Can’t tell Justify your answer:Yes, During the experiment of intervention so there were equally treat to all persons bythe health organisation. By which there is not create bias nature with patients and they will get moresatisfaction by organisation's employees in the effective manner.
Heart Disease Telemonitoring Study_3

Section B: What are the results?7. How large was the treatment effect? (Max 150 words)Justify your answer:Experiment result effects were measured by Critical Appraisal skill Programmes. There isalso use tele- monitoring systems to asses the symptoms of patients by which nurses areeasy to know and identify them.Its help to take effective decision and determine the actual effects of variousexperiments on heart patients. There is basis differences in self care is (p=0.001) and selfefficacy is (p=0.024) its increase 0.9 on 15 point of scale and self care increased 1.5 on10 point of scale this improvement only applied on experimental group.But those persons are taking usual care so their is not having any improvements. In theself efficacy having no major difference after 3 and 6 months. Fluid intake is 0.019 in 3months and 0.086 in 12 months. Adherence of patients in 3 month is 0.023 and in 12month is 0.037.HINT: Consider What outcomes were measured? Is the primary outcome clearly specified? What results were found for each outcome? 8. How precise was the estimate of the treatment effect? (Max 100 words)Justify your answer:Treatment effect estimated by tele monitoring devices there is also use Critical Appraisalskill Programmes. Researcher are most confident for experiments. By these intervention self care become (p= 0.024) and self efficacy is (p= 0.024), afterthe intervention self care increased 1.5 is increased on 10 point of scale and in selfefficacy having no any major differences. Also fluid intake in 3 month is 0.019 it becomein 12 months is 0.086. and adherence of patients is 0.023 in 3 months and in 12 monthsit become 0.037.HINT: Consider What are the confidence limits? Section C: Will the results help locally?
Heart Disease Telemonitoring Study_4

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Emergency Nurse Practitioner Effectiveness
|8
|2011
|55

CASP Checklist: 11 Questions for Randomised Controlled Trial Appraisal
|5
|862
|356

Impact of Foot Massage on Dementia Patients
|9
|2361
|64

Evaluation of effects of nutrition intervention on healing of pressure ulcers and nutritional states (randomized controlled trial)
|8
|1748
|78

Critical appraisal of an article using the CASP tool
|9
|2490
|277

Article 2 Discussion: Immunonutrition
|4
|691
|137