Dataset Information

Early administration of steroids in the ambulance setting: Protocol for a type I hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial with a stepped wedge design.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pediatric asthma exacerbations are a frequent reason for emergency care. Early administration of oral systemic corticosteroids (OCS) in the emergency department (ED) decreases hospitalization rates and ED length-of-stay (LOS). However, it is unknown whether even earlier OCS administration by emergency medical services (EMS) in the prehospital setting further improves outcomes.

Purpose

To describe the background and methods of a type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of EMS-administered OCS for pediatric asthma patients incorporating a stepped wedge design and the RE-AIM framework.

Methods

The study employs a non-randomized stepped wedge design where multiple EMS agencies adopt OCS as a treatment for pediatric asthma exacerbations at varying times. This design accommodates ethical considerations of studying pediatric subjects in the prehospital setting where informed consent is not feasible. We will compare hospitalization rates, ED LOS, and short-term healthcare costs between pediatric asthma patients who do and do not receive OCS from EMS. Using geographic information systems (GIS), we will measure how differences in outcomes scale with increasing EMS transport time. We will use the RE-AIM framework to guide a mixed methods analysis of barriers and enablers to EMS administration of OCS for pediatric asthma patients, including quantitative measures of adoption and uptake and qualitative EMS provider focus group data.

Conclusion

This trial will determine if earlier EMS administration of OCS to pediatric asthma patients decreases hospitalizations, ED LOS, and short-term healthcare costs, and if those outcomes scale with longer EMS transport times. We will identify barriers and enablers to implementing EMS-administered OCS for pediatric asthma patients.

SUBMITTER: Fishe JN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7686057 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe implementation of evidence-based practices in critical care faces specific challenges, including intense time pressure and patient acuity. These challenges result in evidence-to-practice gaps that diminish the impact of proven-effective interventions for patients requiring intensive care unit support. Research is needed to understand and address implementation determinants in critical care settings.MethodsThe Handoffs and Transitions in Critical Care-Understanding Scalability (HATRICC-US) study is a Type 2 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of standardized operating room (OR) to intensive care unit (ICU) handoffs. This mixed methods study will use a stepped wedge design with randomized roll out to test the effectiveness of a customized protocol for structuring communication between clinicians in the OR and the ICU. The study will be conducted in twelve ICUs (10 adult, 2 pediatric) based in five United States academic health systems. Contextual inquiry incorporating implementation science, systems engineering, and human factors engineering approaches will guide both protocol customization and identification of protocol implementation determinants. Implementation mapping will be used to select appropriate implementation strategies for each setting. Human-centered design will be used to create a digital toolkit for dissemination of study findings. The primary implementation outcome will be fidelity to the customized handoff protocol (unit of analysis: handoff). The primary effectiveness outcome will be a composite measure of new-onset organ failure cases (unit of analysis: ICU).DiscussionThe HATRICC-US study will customize, implement, and evaluate standardized procedures for OR to ICU handoffs in a heterogenous group of United States academic medical center intensive care units. Findings from this study have the potential to improve postsurgical communication, decrease adverse clinical outcomes, and inform the implementation of other evidence-based practices in critical care settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04571749 . Date of registration: October 1, 2020.

Project description:IntroductionAs the most common neonatal sensory disorder in the USA, infant hearing loss has an incidence of 1.7 per 1000 births. The consequences of delayed diagnosis and failure to obtain timely intervention include significant communication impairment and negative socioeconomic effects. Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) national standards dictate that all infants should be screened and diagnosed by 3 months of age and there is a need for interventions that promote adherence to timely diagnosis. Patient navigation (PN) has been shown to be efficacious to decrease non-adherence with infant hearing diagnostic care; however, PN has yet to be tested in diverse communities or implemented into real-world settings.Methods and analysisThe proposed research is a community-engaged, type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation trial of a PN intervention aimed at decreasing infant hearing diagnosis non-adherence after failed newborn hearing screening, delivered in state-funded EHDI clinics. Guided by our community advisory board and partners, we aim to (1) test the effectiveness of PN to decrease non-adherence to receipt of infant hearing diagnosis within 3 months after birth using a stepped-wedge trial design, (2) investigate implementation outcomes and factors influencing implementation and (3) determine the cost-effectiveness of PN from the perspective of third-party payers. The study will be conducted from April 2019 until March 2024.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol was approved by the University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board. Although all research involving human subjects contains some risk, there are no known serious risks anticipated from participating in this study. We will seek to disseminate our results in a systematic fashion to patients, key stakeholder, policymakers and the scientific community. Our results will impact the field by partnering with communities to inform the scale-up of this innovative patient supportive intervention to create efficient and effective EHDI programmes and maximise public health impact.Trial registration numberClinicaltrials.gov (Pre-results phase): NCT03875339.

Project description:BackgroundDisparities in posthospitalization outcomes for people with chronic medical conditions and insured by Medicaid are well documented, yet interventions that mitigate them are lacking. Prevailing transitional care interventions narrowly target people aged 65 years and older, with specific disease processes, or limitedly focus on individual-level behavioral change such as self-care or symptom management, thus failing to adequately provide a holistic approach to ensure an optimal posthospital care continuum. This study evaluates the implementation of THRIVE-an evidence-based, equity-focused clinical pathway that supports Medicaid-insured individuals with multiple chronic conditions transitioning from hospital to home by focusing on the social determinants of health and systemic and structural barriers in health care delivery. THRIVE services include coordinating care, standardizing interdisciplinary communication, and addressing unmet clinical and social needs following hospital discharge.ObjectiveThe study's objectives are to (1) examine referral patterns, 30-day readmission, and emergency department use for participants who receive THRIVE support services compared to those receiving usual care and (2) evaluate the implementation of the THRIVE clinical pathway, including fidelity, feasibility, appropriateness, and acceptability.MethodsWe will perform a sequential randomized rollout of THRIVE to case managers at the study hospital in 3 steps (4 in the first group, 4 in the second, and 5 in the third), and data collection will occur over 18 months. Inclusion criteria for THRIVE participation include (1) being Medicaid insured, dually enrolled in Medicaid and Medicare, or Medicaid eligible; (2) residing in Philadelphia; (3) having experienced a hospitalization at the study hospital for more than 24 hours with a planned discharge to home; (4) agreeing to home care at partner home care settings; and (5) being aged 18 years or older. Qualitative data will include interviews with clinicians involved in THRIVE, and quantitative data on health service use (ie, 30-day readmission, emergency department use, and primary and specialty care) will be derived from the electronic health record.ResultsThis project was funded in January 2023 and approved by the institutional review board on March 10, 2023. Data collection will occur from March 2023 to July 2024. Results are expected to be published in 2025.ConclusionsThe THRIVE clinical pathway aims to reduce disparities and improve postdischarge care transitions for Medicaid-insured patients through a system-level intervention that is acceptable for THRIVE participants, clinicians, and their teams in hospitals and home care settings. By using our equity-focused case management services and leveraging the power of the electronic medical record, THRIVE creates efficiencies by identifying high-need patients, improving communication across acute and community-based sectors, and driving evidence-based care coordination. This study will add important findings about how the infusion of equity-focused principles in the design and evaluation of evidence-based interventions contributes to both implementation and effectiveness outcomes.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/54211.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05714605; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05714605.

Project description:BackgroundSepsis survivors experience high morbidity and mortality, and healthcare systems lack effective strategies to address patient needs after hospital discharge. The Sepsis Transition and Recovery (STAR) program is a navigator-led, telehealth-based multicomponent strategy to provide proactive care coordination and monitoring of high-risk patients using evidence-driven, post-sepsis care tasks. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of STAR to improve outcomes for sepsis patients and to examine contextual factors that influence STAR implementation.MethodsThis study uses a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation design to concurrently test clinical effectiveness and gather implementation data. The effectiveness evaluation is a two-arm, pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial at eight hospitals in North Carolina comparing clinical outcomes between sepsis survivors who receive Usual Care versus care delivered through STAR. Each hospital begins in a Usual Care control phase and transitions to STAR in a randomly assigned sequence (one every 4 months). During months that a hospital is allocated to Usual Care, all eligible patients will receive usual care. Once a hospital transitions to STAR, all eligible patients will receive STAR during their hospitalization and extending through 90 days from discharge. STAR includes centrally located nurse navigators using telephonic counseling and electronic health record-based support to facilitate best-practice post-sepsis care strategies including post-discharge review of medications, evaluation for new impairments or symptoms, monitoring existing comorbidities, and palliative care referral when appropriate. Adults admitted with suspected sepsis, defined by clinical criteria for infection and organ failure, are included. Planned enrollment is 4032 patients during a 36-month period. The primary effectiveness outcome is the composite of all-cause hospital readmission or mortality within 90 days of discharge. A mixed-methods implementation evaluation will be conducted before, during, and after STAR implementation.DiscussionThis pragmatic evaluation will test the effectiveness of STAR to reduce combined hospital readmissions and mortality, while identifying key implementation factors. Results will provide practical information to advance understanding of how to integrate post-sepsis management across care settings and facilitate implementation, dissemination, and sustained utilization of best-practice post-sepsis management strategies in other heterogeneous healthcare delivery systems.Trial registrationNCT04495946 . Submitted July 7, 2020; Posted August 3, 2020.

Project description:IntroductionDue to the increase in participation and risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries and concussion in women's Australian Football, an injury prevention programme (Prep-to-Play) was codesigned with consumers (eg, coaches, players) and stakeholders (eg, the Australian Football League). The impact of supported and unsupported interventions on the use of Prep-to-Play (primary aim) and injury rates (secondary aim) will be evaluated in women and girls playing community Australian Football.Methods and analysisThis stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial will include ≥140 teams from U16, U18 or senior women's competitions. All 10 geographically separated clusters (each containing ≥14 teams) will start in the control (unsupported) phase and be randomised to one of five dates (or 'wedges') during the 2021 or 2022 season to sequentially transition to the intervention (supported Prep-to-Play), until all teams receive the intervention. Prep-to-Play includes four elements: a neuromuscular training warm-up, contact-focussed football skills (eg, tackling), strength exercises and education (eg, technique cues). When transitioning to supported interventions, study physiotherapists will deliver a workshop to coaches and player leaders on how to use Prep-to-Play, attend team training at least two times and provide ongoing support. In the unsupported phase, team will continue usual routines and may freely access available Prep-to-Play resources online (eg, posters and videos about the four elements), but without additional face-to-face support. Outcomes will be evaluated throughout the 2021 and 2022 seasons (~14 weeks per season).Primary outcomeuse of Prep-to-Play will be reported via a team designate (weekly) and an independent observer (five visits over the two seasons) and defined as the team completing 75% of the programme, two-thirds (67%) of the time.Secondary outcomesinjuries will be reported by the team sports trainer and/or players. Injury definition: any injury occurring during a football match or training that results in: (1) being unable to return to the field of play for that match or (2) missing ≥ one match. Outcomes in the supported and unsupported phases will be compared using a generalised linear mixed model adjusting for clustering and time. Due to the type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness design, the study is powered to detect a improvement in use of Prep-to-Play and a reduction in ACL injuries.Ethics and disseminationLa Trobe University Ethics Committee (HREC 20488) approved. Coaches provided informed consent to receive the supported intervention and players provided consent to be contacted if they sustained a head or knee injury. Results will be disseminated through partner organisations, peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04856241.

Project description:BackgroundStepped wedge randomised trial designs involve sequential roll-out of an intervention to participants (individuals or clusters) over a number of time periods. By the end of the study, all participants will have received the intervention, although the order in which participants receive the intervention is determined at random. The design is particularly relevant where it is predicted that the intervention will do more good than harm (making a parallel design, in which certain participants do not receive the intervention unethical) and/or where, for logistical, practical or financial reasons, it is impossible to deliver the intervention simultaneously to all participants. Stepped wedge designs offer a number of opportunities for data analysis, particularly for modelling the effect of time on the effectiveness of an intervention. This paper presents a review of 12 studies (or protocols) that use (or plan to use) a stepped wedge design. One aim of the review is to highlight the potential for the stepped wedge design, given its infrequent use to date.MethodsComprehensive literature review of studies or protocols using a stepped wedge design. Data were extracted from the studies in three categories for subsequent consideration: study information (epidemiology, intervention, number of participants), reasons for using a stepped wedge design and methods of data analysis.ResultsThe 12 studies included in this review describe evaluations of a wide range of interventions, across different diseases in different settings. However the stepped wedge design appears to have found a niche for evaluating interventions in developing countries, specifically those concerned with HIV. There were few consistent motivations for employing a stepped wedge design or methods of data analysis across studies. The methodological descriptions of stepped wedge studies, including methods of randomisation, sample size calculations and methods of analysis, are not always complete.ConclusionWhile the stepped wedge design offers a number of opportunities for use in future evaluations, a more consistent approach to reporting and data analysis is required.

Project description:BackgroundAsthma is a prevalent chronic disease that is difficult to manage and associated with marked disparities in outcomes. One promising approach to addressing disparities is shared decision making (SDM), a method by which the patient and provider cooperatively make a decision about asthma care. SDM is associated with improved outcomes for patients; however, time constraints and staff availability are noted implementation barriers. Use of health information technology (IT) solutions may facilitate the utilization of SDM. Coach McLungsSM is a collaborative web-based application that involves pediatric patients, their caregivers, and providers in a personalized experience while gathering patient-reported data. Background logic provides decision support so both audiences can develop a well-informed treatment plan together. The goal of this study is to evaluate the implementation of the Coach McLungsSM intervention into primary care.MethodsImplementation will be evaluated using a stepped wedge randomized control study design at 21 pediatric and family medicine practices within a large, integrated, nonprofit healthcare system. We will measure changes in emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and oral steroid use, which serve as surrogate measures for patient-centered asthma outcomes. We will use a generalized linear mixed models with logit link to test the hypothesis for the reduction in exacerbation rates specifying the fixed effects of intervention and time and random effects for practice and practice*time. This design achieves 84% power to detect the hypothesized effect size difference of 10% in overall exacerbation between control (40%) and intervention (30%) periods (two-sided, p = 0.05). Implementation will be guided using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC), a compilation of implementation strategies, and evaluated using the CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research) and RE-AIM (Reach Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance).DiscussionWe anticipate that a tailored implementation of Coach McLungsSM across diverse primary care practices will lead to a decrease in emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and oral steroid use for patients in the intervention group as compared to the control condition.Trial registrationClincaltrials.gov, NCT05059210. Registered 28 September 2021, https://www.Clinicaltrialsgov/ct2/show/NCT05059210.