Dataset Information

The staircase cluster randomised trial design: A pragmatic alternative to the stepped wedge.

ABSTRACT: This article introduces the 'staircase' design, derived from the zigzag pattern of steps along the diagonal of a stepped wedge design schematic where clusters switch from control to intervention conditions. Unlike a complete stepped wedge design where all participating clusters must collect and provide data for the entire trial duration, clusters in a staircase design are only required to be involved and collect data for a limited number of pre- and post-switch periods. This could alleviate some of the burden on participating clusters, encouraging involvement in the trial and reducing the likelihood of attrition. Staircase designs are already being implemented, although in the absence of a dedicated methodology, approaches to sample size and power calculations have been inconsistent. We provide expressions for the variance of the treatment effect estimator when a linear mixed model for an outcome is assumed for the analysis of staircase designs in order to enable appropriate sample size and power calculations. These include explicit variance expressions for basic staircase designs with one pre- and one post-switch measurement period. We show how the variance of the treatment effect estimator is related to key design parameters and demonstrate power calculations for examples based on a real trial.

SUBMITTER: Grantham KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10863363 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The staircase cluster randomised trial design: A pragmatic alternative to the stepped wedge.

Grantham Kelsey L KL Forbes Andrew B AB Hooper Richard R Kasza Jessica J

Statistical methods in medical research 20231130 1

This article introduces the 'staircase' design, derived from the zigzag pattern of steps along the diagonal of a stepped wedge design schematic where clusters switch from control to intervention conditions. Unlike a complete stepped wedge design where all participating clusters must collect and provide data for the entire trial duration, clusters in a staircase design are only required to be involved and collect data for a limited number of pre- and post-switch periods. This could alleviate some ...[more]

PMID: 38031417

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPeople with dementia are susceptible to adverse drug reactions (ADRs). However, they are not always closely monitored for potential problems relating to their medicines: structured nurse-led ADR Profiles have the potential to address this care gap. We aimed to assess the number and nature of clinical problems identified and addressed and changes in prescribing following introduction of nurse-led medicines' monitoring.DesignPragmatic cohort stepped-wedge cluster Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of structured nurse-led medicines' monitoring versus usual care.SettingFive UK private sector care homes.Participants41 service users, taking at least one antipsychotic, antidepressant or anti-epileptic medicine.InterventionNurses completed the West Wales ADR (WWADR) Profile for Mental Health Medicines with each participant according to trial step.OutcomesProblems addressed and changes in medicines prescribed.Data collection and analysisInformation was collected from participants' notes before randomisation and after each of five monthly trial steps. The impact of the Profile on problems found, actions taken and reduction in mental health medicines was explored in multivariate analyses, accounting for data collection step and site.ResultsFive of 10 sites and 43 of 49 service users approached participated. Profile administration increased the number of problems addressed from a mean of 6.02 [SD 2.92] to 9.86 [4.48], effect size 3.84, 95% CI 2.57-4.11, P <0.001. For example, pain was more likely to be treated (adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 3.84, 1.78-8.30), and more patients attended dentists and opticians (aOR 52.76 [11.80-235.90] and 5.12 [1.45-18.03] respectively). Profile use was associated with reduction in mental health medicines (aOR 4.45, 1.15-17.22).ConclusionThe WWADR Profile for Mental Health Medicines can improve the quality and safety of care, and warrants further investigation as a strategy to mitigate the known adverse effects of prescribed medicines.Trial registrationISRCTN 48133332.

Project description:ObjectivesTo examine whether primary care outreach facilitation improves the quality of care for general practice patients from refugee backgrounds.DesignPragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial, with stepped wedge allocation to early or late intervention groups.Setting, participants31 general practices in three metropolitan areas of Sydney and Melbourne with high levels of refugee resettlement, November 2017 - August 2019.InterventionTrained facilitators made three visits to practices over six months, using structured action plans to help practice teams optimise routines of refugee care.Major outcome measureChange in proportion of patients from refugee backgrounds with documented health assessments (Medicare billing). Secondary outcomes were refugee status recording, interpreter use, and clinician-perceived difficulty in referring patients to appropriate dental, social, settlement, and mental health services.ResultsOur sample comprised 14 633 patients. The intervention was associated with an increase in the proportion of patients with Medicare-billed health assessments during the preceding six months, from 19.1% (95% CI, 18.6-19.5%) to 27.3% (95% CI, 26.7-27.9%; odds ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.42-2.50). The impact of the intervention was greater in smaller practices, practices with larger proportions of patients from refugee backgrounds, recent training in refugee health care, or higher baseline provision of health assessments for such patients. There was no impact on refugee status recording, interpreter use increased modestly, and reported difficulties in refugee-specific referrals to social, settlement and dental services were reduced.ConclusionsLow intensity practice facilitation may improve some aspects of primary care for people from refugee backgrounds. Facilitators employed by local health services could support integrated approaches to enhancing the quality of primary care for this vulnerable population.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618001970235 (retrospective).

Project description:BackgroundContinuity of care, in particular personal continuity, is a core principle of general practice and is associated with many benefits such as a better patient-provider relationship and lower mortality. However, personal continuity is under pressure due to changes in society and healthcare. This affects older patients more than younger patients. As the number of older patients will double the coming decades, an intervention to optimise personal continuity for this group is highly warranted.MethodsFollowing the UK Medical Research Council framework for complex Interventions, we will develop and evaluate an intervention to optimise personal continuity for older patients in general practice. In phase 0, we will perform a literature study to provide the theoretical basis for the intervention. In phase I we will define the components of the intervention by performing surveys and focus groups among patients, general practitioners, practice assistants and practice nurses, concluded by a Delphi study among members of our group. In phase II, we will test and finalise the intervention with input from a pilot study in two general practices. In phase III, we will perform a stepped wedge cluster randomised pragmatic trial. The primary outcome measure is continuity of care from the patients' perspective, measured by the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures are level of implementation, barriers and facilitators for implementation, acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. In phase IV, we will establish the conditions for large-scale implementation.DiscussionThis is the first study to investigate an intervention for improving personal continuity for older patients in general practice. If proven effective, our intervention will enable General practitioners to improve the quality of care for their increasing population of older patients. The pragmatic design of the study will enable evaluation in real-life conditions, facilitating future implementation.Trial registration numberNetherlands Trial Register, trial NL8132 . Registered 2 November 2019.

Project description:Rationale: Care of emergency department (ED) patients with pneumonia can be challenging. Clinical decision support may decrease unnecessary variation and improve care. Objectives: To report patient outcomes and processes of care after deployment of electronic pneumonia clinical decision support (ePNa): a comprehensive, open loop, real-time clinical decision support embedded within the electronic health record. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster-controlled trial with deployment at 2-month intervals in 16 community hospitals. ePNa extracts real-time and historical data to guide diagnosis, risk stratification, microbiological studies, site of care, and antibiotic therapy. We included all adult ED patients with pneumonia over the course of 3 years identified by International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision discharge coding confirmed by chest imaging. Measurements and Main Results: The median age of the 6,848 patients was 67 years (interquartile range, 50-79), and 48% were female; 64.8% were hospital admitted. Unadjusted mortality was 8.6% before and 4.8% after deployment. A mixed effects logistic regression model adjusting for severity of illness with hospital cluster as the random effect showed an adjusted odds ratio of 0.62 (0.49-0.79; P < 0.001) for 30-day all-cause mortality after deployment. Lower mortality was consistent across hospital clusters. ePNa-concordant antibiotic prescribing increased from 83.5% to 90.2% (P < 0.001). The mean time from ED admission to first antibiotic was 159.4 (156.9-161.9) minutes at baseline and 150.9 (144.1-157.8) minutes after deployment (P < 0.001). Outpatient disposition from the ED increased from 29.2% to 46.9%, whereas 7-day secondary hospital admission was unchanged (5.2% vs. 6.1%). ePNa was used by ED clinicians in 67% of eligible patients. Conclusions: ePNa deployment was associated with improved processes of care and lower mortality. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03358342).

Project description:BackgroundShortening time between office visits for patients with uncontrolled hypertension represents a potential strategy for improving blood pressure (BP).ObjectiveWe evaluated the impact of multimodal strategies on time between visits and on improvement in systolic BP (SBP) among patients with uncontrolled hypertension.DesignWe used a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial with three wedges involving 12 federally qualified health centers with three study periods: pre-intervention, intervention, and post-intervention.ParticipantsAdult patients with diagnosed hypertension and two BPs ≥ 140/90 pre-randomization and at least one visit during post-randomization control period (N = 4277).InterventionThe core intervention included three, clinician hypertension group-based trainings, monthly clinician feedback reports, and monthly meetings with practice champions to facilitate implementation.Main measuresThe main measures were change in time between visits when BP was not controlled and change in SBP. A secondary planned outcome was changed in BP control among all hypertension patients in the practices.Key resultsMedian follow-up times were 34, 32, and 32 days and the mean SBPs were 142.0, 139.5, and 139.8 mmHg, respectively. In adjusted analyses, the intervention did not improve time to the next visit compared with control periods, HR = 1.01 (95% CI: 0.98, 1.04). SBP was reduced by 1.13 mmHg (95% CI: -2.10, -0.16), but was not maintained during follow-up. Hypertension control (< 140/90) in the practices improved by 5% during intervention (95% CI: 2.6%, 7.3%) and was sustained post-intervention 5.4% (95% CI: 2.6%, 8.2%).ConclusionsThe intervention failed to shorten follow-up time for patients with uncontrolled BP and showed very small, statistically significant improvements in SBP that were not sustained. However, the intervention showed statistically and clinically relevant improvement in hypertension control suggesting that the intervention affected clinician decision-making regarding BP control apart from visit frequency. Future practice initiatives should consider hypertension control as a primary outcome.Clinical trialwww.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02164331.

Dataset Information

The staircase cluster randomised trial design: A pragmatic alternative to the stepped wedge.

Publications

The staircase cluster randomised trial design: A pragmatic alternative to the stepped wedge.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets