Dataset Information

Healing Right Way: study protocol for a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to enhance rehabilitation services and improve quality of life in Aboriginal Australians after brain injury.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Despite higher incidence of brain injury among Aboriginal compared with non-Aboriginal Australians, suboptimal engagement exists between rehabilitation services and Aboriginal brain injury survivors. Aboriginal patients often feel culturally insecure in hospital and navigation of services post discharge is complex. Health professionals report feeling ill-equipped working with Aboriginal patients. This study will test the impact of a research-informed culturally secure intervention model for Aboriginal people with brain injury. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Design: Stepped wedge cluster randomised control trial design; intervention sequentially introduced at four pairs of healthcare sites across Western Australia at 26-week intervals.Recruitment: Aboriginal participants aged ≥18 years within 4 weeks of an acute stroke or traumatic brain injury.Intervention: (1) Cultural security training for hospital staff and (2) local, trial-specific, Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinators supporting participants.Primary outcome: Quality-of-life using EuroQOL-5D-3L (European Quality of Life scale, five dimensions, three severity levels) Visual Analogue Scale score at 26 weeks post injury. Recruitment of 312 participants is estimated to detect a difference of 15 points with 80% power at the 5% significance level. A linear mixed model will be used to assess the between-condition difference.Secondary outcome measures: Modified Rankin Scale, Functional Independence Measure, Modified Caregiver Strain Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 12 and 26 weeks post injury, rehabilitation occasions of service received, hospital compliance with minimum care processes by 26 weeks post injury, acceptability of Intervention Package, feasibility of Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinator role.Evaluations: An economic evaluation will determine the potential cost-effectiveness of the intervention. Process evaluation will document fidelity to study processes and capture changing contexts including barriers to intervention implementation and acceptability/feasibility of the intervention through participant questionnaires at 12 and 26 weeks.

Ethics and dissemination

The study has approvals from Aboriginal, university and health services human research ethics committees. Findings will be disseminated through stakeholder reports, participant workshops, peer-reviewed journal articles and conference papers.

Trial registration number

ACTRN12618000139279.

SUBMITTER: Armstrong E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8479943 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter respectfully referred to as Aboriginal) people are Australia's First Peoples, having the longest continuous culture in the world and deep spiritual connections with ancestral land. Improvements in their health and well-being is a major policy goal of Australian governments, as the legacy of colonisation and disruption of cultural practices contribute to major health challenges. Lack of culturally secure services impacts participation of Aboriginal people in health services. Aboriginal people with a brain injury typically experience poor access to rehabilitation and support following hospital discharge. 'Healing Right Way' (HRW) is a randomised control trial aiming to improve access to interdisciplinary and culturally secure rehabilitation services for Aboriginal people after brain injury in Western Australia, improve health outcomes and provide the first best practice model. This protocol is for the process evaluation of the HRW trial.Methods and analysisA prospective mixed methods process evaluation will use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to evaluate implementation and intervention processes involved in HRW. Data collection includes qualitative and quantitative data from all sites during control and intervention phases, relating to three categories: (1) implementation of trial processes; (2) cultural security training; and (3) Aboriginal Brain Injury Coordinator role. Additional data elements collected from HRW will support the process evaluation regarding fidelity and intervention integrity. Iterative cross-sectional and longitudinal data synthesis will support the implementation of HRW, interpretation of findings and inform future development and implementation of culturally secure interventions for Aboriginal people.Ethics and disseminationThis process evaluation was reviewed by The University of Western Australia Human Research Ethics Committee (RA/4/20/4952). Evaluation findings will be disseminated via academic mechanisms, seminars at trial sites, regional Aboriginal health forums, peak bodies for Aboriginal health organisations and the Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet (https://healthinfonet.ecu.edu.au/).Trial registration numberACTRN12618000139279.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Gaps in maternal and child health services can slow progress towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. The Management and Optimization of Nutrition, Antenatal, Reproductive, Child Health & HIV Care (MONARCH) study will evaluate a Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) intervention targeted at improving antenatal and postnatal health service outcomes in rural South Africa where HIV prevalence among pregnant women is extremely high. Specifically, it will establish the effectiveness of CQI on viral load (VL) testing in pregnant women who are HIV-positive and repeat HIV testing in pregnant women who are HIV-negative. METHODS:This is a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 7 nurse-led primary healthcare clinics to establish the effect of CQI on selected routine antenatal and postnatal services. Each clinic was a cluster, with the exception of the two smallest clinics, which jointly formed one cluster. The intervention was applied at the cluster level, where staff received training on CQI methodology and additional mentoring as required. In the control exposure state, the clusters received the South African Department of Health standard of care. After a baseline data collection period of 2 months, the first cluster crossed over from control to intervention exposure state; subsequently, one additional cluster crossed over every 2 months. The six clusters were divided into 3 groups by patient volume (low, medium and high). We randomised the six clusters to the sequences of crossing over, such that both the first three and the last three sequences included one cluster with low, one with medium, and one with high patient volume. The primary outcome measures were (i) viral load testing among pregnant women who were HIV-positive, and (ii) repeat HIV testing among pregnant women who were HIV-negative. Consenting women ?18 years attending antenatal and postnatal care during the data collection period completed outcome measures at delivery, and postpartum at three to 6 days, and 6 weeks. Data collection started on 15 July 2015. The total study duration, including pre- and post-exposure phases, was 19 months. Data will be analyzed by intention-to-treat based on first booked clinic of study participants. DISCUSSION:The results of the MONARCH trial will establish the effectiveness of CQI in improving antenatal and postnatal clinic processes in primary care in sub-Saharan Africa. More generally, the results will contribute to our knowledge on quality improvement interventions in resource-poor settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial was registered on 10 December 2015: www.clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT02626351 .

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to examine the impact of the 'ICAN QUIT in Pregnancy' intervention on individual health providers (HPs) smoking cessation care (SCC) knowledge, attitudes and practices in general, and specifically regarding nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) prescription.DesignStep-wedge clustered randomised controlled study. HPs answered a preintervention and 1-6 months postintervention survey.SettingSix Aboriginal Medical Services (AMSs) in three states of Australia.ParticipantsAll HPs were invited to participate. Of 93 eligible, 50 consented (54%), 45 completed the presurvey (90%) and 20 the post (40%).InterventionIncluded three 1-hour webinar sessions, educational resource package and free oral NRT.OutcomesHPs knowledge was measured using two composite scores-one from all 24 true/false statements, and one from 12 NRT-specific statements. Self-assessment of 22 attitudes to providing SCC were measured using a five-point Likert scale (Strongly disagree to Strongly agree). Two composite mean scores were calculated-one for 15 general SCC attitudes, and one for 7 NRT-specific attitudes. Self-reported provision of SCC components was measured on a five-point Likert scale (Never to Always). Feasibility outcomes, and data collected on the service and patient level are reported elsewhere.ResultsMean knowledge composite scores improved from pre to post (78% vs 84% correct, difference 5.95, 95% CI 1.57 to 10.32). Mean NRT-specific knowledge composite score also improved (68% vs 79% correct, difference 9.9, 95% CI 3.66 to 16.14). Mean attitude composite score improved (3.65 (SD 0.4) to 3.87 (SD 0.4), difference 0.23, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.41). Mean NRT-specific attitudes composite score also improved (3.37 (SD 0.6) to 3.64 (SD 0.7), difference 0.36, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.6). Self-reported practices were unchanged, including prescribing NRT.ConclusionsA multicomponent culturally sensitive intervention in AMSs was feasible, and might improve HPs provision of SCC to pregnant Aboriginal women. Changes in NRT prescription rates may require additional intensive measures.Trial registration numberACTRN 12616001603404; Results.

Project description:BackgroundSuccessful and sustainable models for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery in public health systems in Africa are needed. We aimed to evaluate the implementation of PrEP delivery integrated in public HIV care clinics in Kenya.MethodsAs part of Kenya's national PrEP roll-out, we conducted a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised pragmatic trial to catalyse scale-up of PrEP delivery integrated in 25 public HIV care clinics. We selected high-volume clinics in these regions (ie, those with a high number of people living with HIV enrolled in HIV care and treatment). Clinics (each representing a cluster) were stratified by region and randomly assigned to the order in which clinic staff would receive PrEP training and ongoing technical support using numbered opaque balls picked from a bag. There was no masking. PrEP provision was done by clinic staff without additional financial support. Data were abstracted from records of individuals initiating PrEP. The primary outcome was the number of people initiating PrEP per clinic per month comparing intervention to control periods. Other outcomes included PrEP continuation, adherence, and incident HIV infections. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03052010.FindingsAfter the baseline period, which started in January, 2017, every month two to six HIV care clinics crossed over from control to intervention, until August, 2017, when all clinics were implementing the intervention. Of 4898 individuals initiating PrEP (27 during the control period and 4871 during the intervention period), 2640 (54%) were women, the median age was 31 years (IQR 25-39), and 4092 (84%) reported having a partner living with HIV. The mean monthly number of PrEP initiations per clinic was 0·1 (SD 0·5) before the intervention and 7·5 (2·7) after intervention introduction (rate ratio 23·7, 95% CI 14·2-39·5, p<0·0001). PrEP continuation was 57% at 1 month, 44% at 3 months, and 34% at 6 months, and 12% of those who missed a refill returned later for PrEP re-initiation. Tenofovir diphosphate was detected in 68 (96%) of 71 blood samples collected from a randomly selected subset of participants. Six HIV infections were observed over 2531 person-years of observation (incidence 0·24 cases per 100 person-years), three of which occurred at the first visit after PrEP initiation.InterpretationWe observed high uptake, reasonable continuation with high adherence, frequent PrEP restarts, and low HIV incidence. Integration of PrEP services within public HIV care clinics in Africa is feasible.FundingNational Institute of Mental Health and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.