Faculty Opinions recommendation of Effect of the World Health Organization checklist on patient outcomes: a stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial.

Author(s):  
M Rashad Massoud
Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Dubreucq ◽  
M. Faraldo ◽  
M. Abbes ◽  
B. Ycart ◽  
H. Richard-Lepouriel ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Self-stigma is highly prevalent in serious mental illness (SMI) and is associated with poorer clinical and functional outcomes. Narrative enhancement and cognitive therapy (NECT) is a group-based intervention combining psychoeducation, cognitive restructuring and story-telling exercises to reduce self-stigma and its impact on recovery-related outcomes. Despite evidence of its effectiveness on self-stigma in schizophrenia-related disorders, it is unclear whether NECT can impact social functioning. Methods This is a 12-centre stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial of NECT effectiveness on social functioning in SMI, compared to treatment as usual. One hundred and twenty participants diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or borderline personality disorder will be recruited across the 12 sites. The 12 centres participating to the study will be randomized into two groups: one group (group 1) receiving the intervention at the beginning of the study (T0) and one group (group 2) being a control group for the first 6 months and receiving the intervention after (T1). Outcomes will be compared in both groups at T0 and T1, and 6-month and 12-month outcomes for groups 1 and 2 will be measured without a control group at T2 (to evaluate the stability of the effects over time). Evaluations will be conducted by assessors blind to treatment allocation. The primary outcome is personal and social performance compared across randomization groups. Secondary outcomes include self-stigma, self-esteem, wellbeing, quality of life, illness severity, depressive symptoms and personal recovery. Discussion NECT is a promising intervention for reducing self-stigma and improving recovery-related outcomes in SMI. If shown to be effective in this trial, it is likely that NECT will be implemented in psychiatric rehabilitation services with subsequent implications for routine clinical practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03972735. Trial registration date 31 May 2019.


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdou Amza ◽  
Boubacar Kadri ◽  
Beido Nassirou ◽  
Ahmed M. Arzika ◽  
Ariana Austin ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends annual mass azithromycin distribution until districts drop below 5% prevalence of trachomatous inflammation—follicular (TF). Districts with very low TF prevalence may have little or no transmission of the ocular strains of Chlamydia trachomatis that cause trachoma, and additional rounds of mass azithromycin distribution may not be useful. Here, we describe the protocol for a randomized controlled trial designed to evaluate whether mass azithromycin distribution can be stopped prior to the current WHO guidelines. Methods The Azithromycin Reduction to Reach Elimination of Trachoma (ARRET) study is a 1:1 community randomized non-inferiority trial designed to evaluate whether mass azithromycin distribution can be stopped in districts with baseline prevalence of TF under 20%. Communities in Maradi, Niger are randomized after baseline assessment either to continued annual mass azithromycin distribution or stopping annual azithromycin distribution over a 3-year period. We will compare the prevalence of ocular C. trachomatis (primary outcome), TF and other clinical signs of trachoma, and serologic markers of trachoma after 3 years. We hypothesize that stopping annual azithromycin distribution will be non-inferior to continued annual azithromycin distributions for all markers of trachoma prevalence and transmission. Discussion The results of this trial are anticipated to provide potentially guideline-changing evidence for when mass azithromycin distributions can be stopped in low TF prevalence areas. Trial registration number This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04185402). Registered December 4, 2019; prospectively registered pre-results.


Trials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Deverick J. Anderson ◽  
Iulian Ilieş ◽  
Katherine Foy ◽  
Nicole Nehls ◽  
James C. Benneyan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Surgical site infections (SSIs) cause significant patient suffering. Surveillance and feedback of SSI rates is an evidence-based strategy to reduce SSIs, but traditional surveillance methods are slow and prone to bias. The objective of this cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to determine if using optimized statistical process control (SPC) charts for SSI surveillance and feedback lead to a reduction in SSI rates compared to traditional surveillance. Methods The Early 2RIS Trial is a prospective, multicenter cluster RCT using a stepped wedge design. The trial will be performed in 29 hospitals in the Duke Infection Control Outreach Network (DICON) and 105 clusters over 4 years, from March 2016 through February 2020; year one represents a baseline period; thereafter, 8–9 clusters will be randomized to intervention every 3 months over a 3-year period using a stepped wedge randomization design. All patients who undergo one of 13 targeted procedures at study hospitals will be included in the analysis; these procedures will be included in one of six clusters: cardiac, orthopedic, gastrointestinal, OB-GYN, vascular, and spinal. All clusters will undergo traditional surveillance for SSIs; once randomized to intervention, clusters will also undergo surveillance and feedback using optimized SPC charts. Feedback on surveillance data will be provided to all clusters, regardless of allocation or type of surveillance. The primary endpoint is the difference in rates of SSI between the SPC intervention compared to traditional surveillance and feedback alone. Discussion The traditional approach for SSI surveillance and feedback has several major deficiencies because SSIs are rare events. First, traditional statistical methods require aggregation of measurements over time, which delays analysis until enough data accumulate. Second, traditional statistical tests and resulting p values are difficult to interpret. Third, analyses based on average SSI rates during predefined time periods have limited ability to rapidly identify important, real-time trends. Thus, standard analytic methods that compare average SSI rates between arbitrarily designated time intervals may not identify an important SSI rate increase on time unless the “signal” is very strong. Therefore, novel strategies for early identification and investigation of SSI rate increases are needed to decrease SSI rates. While SPC charts are used throughout industry and healthcare to improve and optimize processes, including other types of healthcare-associated infections, they have not been evaluated as a tool for SSI surveillance and feedback in a randomized trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.govNCT03075813, Registered March 9, 2017.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document