Dataset Information

Development of a Mobile Tool That Semiautomatically Screens Patients for Stroke Clinical Trials.

ABSTRACT: Despite several national coordinated research networks, enrollment in many cerebrovascular trials remains challenging. An electronic tool was needed that would improve the efficiency and efficacy of screening for multiple simultaneous acute clinical stroke trials by automating the evaluation of inclusion and exclusion criteria, improving screening procedures and streamlining the communication process between the stroke research coordinators and the stroke clinicians.A multidisciplinary group consisting of physicians, study coordinators, and biostatisticians designed and developed an electronic clinical trial screening tool on a HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)-compliant platform.A web-based tool was developed that uses branch logic to determine eligibility for simultaneously enrolling clinical trials and automatically notifies the study coordinator teams about eligible patients. After 12 weeks of use, 225 surveys were completed, and 51 patients were enrolled in acute stroke clinical trials. Compared with the 12 weeks before implementation of the tool, there was an increase in enrollment from 16.5% of patients screened to 23.4% of patients screened (P<0.05). Clinicians and coordinators reported increased satisfaction with the process and improved ease of screening.We created a semiautomated electronic screening tool that uses branch logic to screen patients for stroke clinical trials. The tool has improved efficiency and efficacy of screening, and it could be adapted for use at other sites and in other medical fields.

SUBMITTER: Spokoyny I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5039105 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development of a Mobile Tool That Semiautomatically Screens Patients for Stroke Clinical Trials.

Spokoyny Ilana I Lansberg Maarten M Thiessen Rosita R Kemp Stephanie M SM Aksoy Didem D Lee YongJae Y Mlynash Michael M Hirsch Karen G KG

Stroke 20160908 10

<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Despite several national coordinated research networks, enrollment in many cerebrovascular trials remains challenging. An electronic tool was needed that would improve the efficiency and efficacy of screening for multiple simultaneous acute clinical stroke trials by automating the evaluation of inclusion and exclusion criteria, improving screening procedures and streamlining the communication process between the stroke research coordinators and the stroke clinician ...[more]

PMID: 27608822

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective To improve the selection of patients with acute ischaemic stroke for intra-arterial treatment using a clinical decision tool to predict individual treatment benefit.Design Multivariable regression modelling with data from two randomised controlled clinical trials.Setting 16 hospitals in the Netherlands (derivation cohort) and 58 hospitals in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Europe (validation cohort).Participants 500 patients from the Multicenter Randomised Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischaemic Stroke in the Netherlands trial (derivation cohort) and 260 patients with intracranial occlusion from the Interventional Management of Stroke III trial (validation cohort).Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days after stroke. We constructed an ordinal logistic regression model to predict outcome and treatment benefit, defined as the difference between the predicted probability of good functional outcome (mRS score 0-2) with and without intra-arterial treatment.Results 11 baseline clinical and radiological characteristics were included in the model. The externally validated C statistic was 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.73) for the ordinal model and 0.73 (0.67 to 0.79) for the prediction of good functional outcome, indicating moderate discriminative ability. The mean predicted treatment benefit varied between patients in the combined derivation and validation cohort from -2.3% to 24.3%. There was benefit of intra-arterial treatment predicted for some individual patients from groups in which no treatment effect was found in previous subgroup analyses, such as those with no or poor collaterals.Conclusion The proposed clinical decision tool combines multiple baseline clinical and radiological characteristics and shows large variations in treatment benefit between patients. The tool is clinically useful as it aids in distinguishing between individual patients who may experience benefit from intra-arterial treatment for acute ischaemic stroke and those who will not.Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT00359424 (IMS III) and isrctn.com ISRCTN10888758 (MR CLEAN).

Project description:Importance:Transferring patients with large-vessel occlusion (LVO) or intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) to hospitals not providing interventional treatment options is an unresolved medical problem. Objective:To determine how optimized prehospital management (OPM) based on use of the Los Angeles Motor Scale (LAMS) compares with management in a Mobile Stroke Unit (MSU) in accurately triaging patients to the appropriate hospital with (comprehensive stroke center [CSC]) or without (primary stroke center [PSC]) interventional treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this randomized multicenter trial with 3-month follow-up, patients were assigned week-wise to one of the pathways between June 15, 2015, and November 15, 2017, in 2 regions of Saarland, Germany; 708 of 824 suspected stroke patients did not meet inclusion criteria, resulting in a study population of 116 adult patients. Interventions:Patients received either OPM based on a standard operating procedure that included the use of the LAMS (cut point ?4) or management in an MSU (an ambulance with vascular imaging, point-of-care laboratory, and telecommunication capabilities). Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary end point was the proportion of patients accurately triaged to either CSCs (LVO, ICH) or PSCs (others). Results:A predefined interim analysis was performed after 116 patients of the planned 232 patients had been enrolled. Of these, 53 were included in the OPM group (67.9% women; mean [SD] age, 74 [11] years) and 63 in the MSU group (57.1% women; mean [SD] age, 75 [11] years). The primary end point, an accurate triage decision, was reached for 37 of 53 patients (69.8%) in the OPM group and for 63 of 63 patients (100%) in the MSU group (difference, 30.2%; 95% CI, 17.8%-42.5%; P?<?.001). Whereas 7 of 17 OPM patients (41.2%) with LVO or ICH required secondary transfers from a PSC to a CSC, none of the 11 MSU patients (0%) required such transfers (difference, 41.2%; 95% CI, 17.8%-64.6%; P?=?.02). The LAMS at a cut point of 4 or higher led to an accurate diagnosis of LVO or ICH for 13 of 17 patients (76.5%; 6 triaged to a CSC) and of LVO selectively for 7 of 9 patients (77.8%; 2 triaged to a CSC). Stroke management metrics were better in the MSU group, although patient outcomes were not significantly different. Conclusions and Relevance:Whereas prehospital management optimized by LAMS allows accurate triage decisions for approximately 70% of patients, MSU-based management enables accurate triage decisions for 100%. Depending on the specific health care environment considered, both approaches are potentially valuable in triaging stroke patients. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02465346.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Investigator-led multicentre randomised trials are essential to generate evidence on the optimal use of medical interventions. These non-commercial trials are often hampered by underfunding, which may lead to difficulties in gathering a team with the necessary expertise, a delayed trial start, slow recruitment and even early trial discontinuation. As a new public funder of pragmatic clinical trials, the KCE Trials programme was committed to correctly pay all trial activities in order to assure timely delivery of high-quality trial results. As no appropriate trial budget tool was readily publicly available that took into account the costs for the sponsor as well as the costs for participating sites, we developed a tool to make the budgeting of a clinical trial efficient, transparent and fair across applicants. METHODS:All trial-related activities of the sponsor and sites were categorised, and cost drivers were identified. All elements were included in a spreadsheet tool allowing the sponsor team to calculate in detail the various activities of a clinical trial and to appreciate the budget impact of specific cost drivers, e.g. a delay in recruitment. Hourly fees by role were adapted from published data. Fixed amounts per activity were developed when appropriate. RESULTS:This publicly available tool has already been used for 17 trials funded since the start of the KCE Trials programme in 2016, and it continues to be used and improved. This budget tool is used together with additional risk-reducing measures such as a multistep selection process with advance payments, a recruitment feasibility check by sponsor and funder, a close monitoring of study progress and a milestone-based payment schedule with the last payment made when the manuscript is submitted. CONCLUSIONS:The budget tool helps the KCE Trials programme to answer relevant research questions in a timely way, within budget and with high quality, a necessary condition to achieve impact of this programme for patients, clinical practice and healthcare payers.

Dataset Information

Development of a Mobile Tool That Semiautomatically Screens Patients for Stroke Clinical Trials.

Publications

Development of a Mobile Tool That Semiautomatically Screens Patients for Stroke Clinical Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets