Dataset Information

Reporting of complex interventions in clinical trials: development of a taxonomy to classify and describe fall-prevention interventions.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Interventions for preventing falls in older people often involve several components, multidisciplinary teams, and implementation in a variety of settings. We have developed a classification system (taxonomy) to describe interventions used to prevent falls in older people, with the aim of improving the design and reporting of clinical trials of fall-prevention interventions, and synthesis of evidence from these trials.

Methods

Thirty three international experts in falls prevention and health services research participated in a series of meetings to develop consensus. Robust techniques were used including literature reviews, expert presentations, and structured consensus workshops moderated by experienced facilitators. The taxonomy was refined using an international test panel of five health care practitioners. We assessed the chance corrected agreement of the final version by comparing taxonomy completion for 10 randomly selected published papers describing a variety of fall-prevention interventions.

Results

The taxonomy consists of four domains, summarized as the "Approach", "Base", "Components" and "Descriptors" of an intervention. Sub-domains include; where participants are identified; the theoretical approach of the intervention; clinical targeting criteria; details on assessments; descriptions of the nature and intensity of interventions. Chance corrected agreement of the final version of the taxonomy was good to excellent for all items. Further independent evaluation of the taxonomy is required.

Conclusions

The taxonomy is a useful instrument for characterizing a broad range of interventions used in falls prevention. Investigators are encouraged to use the taxonomy to report their interventions.

SUBMITTER: Lamb SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3127768 | biostudies-literature | 2011 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reporting of complex interventions in clinical trials: development of a taxonomy to classify and describe fall-prevention interventions.

Lamb Sarah E SE Becker Clemens C Gillespie Lesley D LD Smith Jessica L JL Finnegan Susanne S Potter Rachel R Pfeiffer Klaus K

Trials 20110517

<h4>Background</h4>Interventions for preventing falls in older people often involve several components, multidisciplinary teams, and implementation in a variety of settings. We have developed a classification system (taxonomy) to describe interventions used to prevent falls in older people, with the aim of improving the design and reporting of clinical trials of fall-prevention interventions, and synthesis of evidence from these trials.<h4>Methods</h4>Thirty three international experts in falls ...[more]

PMID: 21586143

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStandards for the reporting of factorial randomised trials remain to be established. We aimed to review the quality of reporting of methodological aspects of published factorial trials of complex interventions in community settings.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register to identify factorial randomised trials of complex interventions in community settings from January 2000 to August 2009. We also conducted a citation search of two review papers published in 2003. Data were extracted by two reviewers on 22 items relating to study design, analysis and presentation.ResultsWe identified 5941 unique titles, from which 116 full papers were obtained and 76 were included in the review. The included trials reflected a broad range of target conditions and types of intervention. The median sample size was 400 (interquartile range 191-1001). Most (88%) trials employed a 2 × 2 factorial design. Few trials (21%) explicitly stated the rationale for using a factorial design. Reporting of aspects of design, analysis or presentation specific to factorial trials was variable, but there was no evidence that reporting of these aspects was different for trials published before or after 2003. However, for CONSORT items that apply generally to the reporting of all trials, there was some evidence that later studies were more likely to report employing an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach (78% vs 52%), present appropriate between-group estimates of effect (88% vs 63%), and present standard errors or 95% confidence intervals for such estimates (78% vs 56%). Interactions between interventions and some measure of the precision associated with such effects were reported in only 14 (18%) trials.ConclusionsReports of factorial trials of complex interventions in community settings vary in the amount of information they provide regarding important methodological aspects of design and analysis. This variability supports the extension of CONSORT guidelines to include the specific reporting of factorial trials.

Project description:BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to identify which information is included when reporting educational interventions used to facilitate foundational skills and knowledge of evidence-based practice (EBP) training for health professionals. This systematic review comprised the first stage in the three stage development process for a reporting guideline for educational interventions for EBP. METHODS: The review question was 'What information has been reported when describing educational interventions targeting foundational evidence-based practice knowledge and skills?'MEDLINE, Academic Search Premier, ERIC, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Informit health, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched from inception until October - December 2011. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials reporting original data on educational interventions specific to developing foundational knowledge and skills of evidence-based practice were included.Studies were not appraised for methodological bias, however, reporting frequency and item commonality were compared between a random selection of studies included in the systematic review and a random selection of studies excluded as they were not controlled trials. Twenty-five data items were extracted by two independent reviewers (consistency > 90%). RESULTS: Sixty-one studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 29 randomised, n = 32 non-randomised). The most consistently reported items were the learner's stage of training, professional discipline and the evaluation methods used (100%). The least consistently reported items were the instructor(s) previous teaching experience (n = 8, 13%), and student effort outside face to face contact (n = 1, 2%). CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates inconsistencies in describing educational interventions for EBP in randomised and non-randomised trials. To enable educational interventions to be replicable and comparable, improvements in the reporting for educational interventions for EBP are required. In the absence of a specific reporting guideline, there are a range of items which are reported with variable frequency. Identifying the important items for describing educational interventions for facilitating foundational knowledge and skills in EBP remains to be determined. The findings of this systematic review will be used to inform the next stage in the development of a reporting guideline for educational interventions for EBP.

Project description:BackgroundExercise interventions are highly effective at preventing falls in older people living in the community. In residential aged care facilities (RACFs), however, the evidence for effectiveness is highly variable, warranting exploration of drivers of successful trials. This study aims to identify the conditions of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that are associated with reducing falls in RACFs and test whether it can explain the variability.MethodsRCTs testing exercise interventions in RACFs compared to usual care, reporting rate or risk of falls from the 2018 Cochrane Collaboration review and a search update to December 2022 were included. Two authors independently extracted and coded trial conditions and outcomes according to a theory developed from prior Intervention Component Analysis. Trial outcomes were coded as successful or unsuccessful based on point estimates for the rate or risk ratio for falls, or p value. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), utilising Boolean minimisation theory, was conducted to determine the key conditions driving trial success. A subgroup meta-analysis and the GRADE approach was applied to the final theory.ResultsEighteen trials undertaken in 11 countries with 2,287 residents were included. Participants were predominately ambulant females aged 70 to 80 with cognitive impairment. Most interventions were fully supervised or supervised at the start of the intervention. QCA identified two configurations as drivers of successful exercise falls prevention programs: (i) group exercise that is moderate or low intensity, or (ii) for independent ambulatory residents, exercise for more than 1 h per week. The combination of configuration (i) and (ii) had consistency and total coverage scores of 1, indicating all trials were explained. This combination was associated with a reduction in falls (rate ratio 0.45, 95%CI 0.34 to 0.59; risk ratio 0.66, 95%CI 0.53 to 0.82; low certainty evidence).ConclusionTo successfully reduce falls in RACFs, exercise programs should provide continuous supervised moderate-intensity group exercise. For programs that mostly include independent ambulatory residents, exercise for at least 80 min per week should be provided. As many current residents are frail, tailored exercise is likely necessary and an individualised dose may be required. Future trials should test exercise interventions for less mobile residents.

Project description:BackgroundRandomized trials of complex, non-pharmacologic interventions implemented in home and community settings, such as the University of Southern California (USC)-Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center (RLANRC) Pressure Ulcer Prevention Study (PUPS), present unique challenges with respect to (1) participant recruitment and retention, (2) intervention delivery and fidelity, (3) randomization and assessment, and (4) potential inadvertent treatment effects.PurposeWe describe the methods employed to address the challenges confronted in implementing PUPS. In this randomized controlled trial, we are assessing the efficacy of a complex, preventive intervention in reducing the incidence of, and costs associated with, the development of medically serious pressure ulcers in people with spinal cord injury.MethodsIndividuals with spinal cord injury recruited from RLANRC were assigned to either a 12-month preventive intervention group or a standard care control group. The primary outcome is the incidence of serious pressure ulcers with secondary endpoints including ulcer-related surgeries, medical treatment costs, and quality of life. These outcomes are assessed at 12 and 24 months after randomization. Additionally, we are studying the mediating mechanisms that account for intervention outcomes.ResultsPUPS has been successfully implemented, including recruitment of the target sample size of 170 participants, assurance of the integrity of intervention protocol delivery with an average 90% treatment adherence rate, and enactment of the assessment plan. However, implementation has been replete with challenges. To meet recruitment goals, we instituted a five-pronged approach customized for an underserved, ethnically diverse population. In intervention delivery, we increased staff time to overcome economic and cultural barriers to retention and adherence. To ensure treatment fidelity and replicability, we monitored intervention protocol delivery in accordance with a rigorous plan. Finally, we have overcome unanticipated assessment and design concerns related to (1) determining pressure ulcer incidence/severity, (2) randomization imbalance, and (3) inadvertent potential control group contamination.LimitationsWe have addressed the most daunting challenges encountered in the recruitment, assessment, and intervention phases of PUPS. Some challenges and solutions may not apply to trials conducted in other settings.ConclusionsOvercoming challenges has required a multifaceted approach incorporating individualization, flexibility, and persistence, as well as the ability to implement needed mid-course corrections.

Dataset Information

Reporting of complex interventions in clinical trials: development of a taxonomy to classify and describe fall-prevention interventions.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Reporting of complex interventions in clinical trials: development of a taxonomy to classify and describe fall-prevention interventions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets