AzTrials
AzTrials

CroupNCT00147849

A Cluster Controlled Trial Comparing Three Methods of Disseminating Practice Guidelines for Children With Croup

A study testing mailing of printed educational materials, a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders and identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processes in people with Croup, run by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR).

Terminated

Stopped early. The study ended before it was planned to and will not resume.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The purpose of this study is to identify, from a societal perspective, the costs and associated benefits of three strategies for disseminating and implementing a practice guideline that addresses the management of croup. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 0 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Croup
What is being tested?
mailing of printed educational materials, a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders and identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processes
How many people
Not given
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
Sep 2000to Mar 2006
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 0 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Alberta hospitals were rank ordered based on the number of disease episodes and rates of hospitalization for a six-year period. We then approached in this order each of the hospital administrators and clinical staff for permission to include their hospital in our study until a total of 24 hospitals consented

Who cannot join

  • Refusal by hospital staff to participate in this trial

About this study

Official title: A Cluster Controlled Trial Comparing Three Methods of Disseminating Practice

The purpose of this study is to identify, from a societal perspective, the costs and associated benefits of three strategies for disseminating and implementing a practice guideline that addresses the management of croup.

Read the detailed description

Overall Aim: The overall aim of this study is to identify - from a societal perspective - the costs and associated benefits of three strategies for implementing a practice guideline that addresses the management of croup.

Intervention Strategies: The intervention strategies to be compared will be mailing of printed educational materials (the "Standard intervention"), mailing plus a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders (a "Saturn intervention"), and a combination of mailing, interactive sessions, outreach visits, reminders plus identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processes (a "Cadillac intervention").

Primary Objective: To determine which of the three intervention strategies are most effective at lowering the rate of hospital days per 1,000 disease episodes. The null hypothesis is that none of the intervention strategies reduce hospital utilization rates from baseline. The alternate hypothesis is that the intervention strategies will have a graded degree of effect on hospitalization rates, with the 'Standard intervention' having minimal to no effect, the 'Saturn intervention' having moderate but significant effect, and the 'Cadillac intervention' having the greatest effect.

Secondary Objective: To determine which of the three dissemination strategies are most effective at increasing the use of therapies of known benefit.

Economic Analysis: To determine which of the three intervention strategies will most effectively reduce total societal costs including all health care costs, costs borne by the family, and costs stemming from the strategies for disseminating guidelines.

Other Objectives: To determine which dissemination strategy will most effectively maintain or improve clinical outcomes and maintain or reduce the family psychosocial burden. Clinical outcomes assessed will include both uncommon severe events such as endotracheal intubation, respiratory arrest, and death, as well as average duration of clinical symptoms. The assessment of family psychosocial burden will include the number of hours of sleep missed by the child, and the stress experienced by the primary caregiver (most commonly the mother).

Study Plan: The study objectives will be achieved through the following:

  1. We are completing a baseline survey which a) documents Alberta-wide utilization rates for health care services; b) documents severe adverse outcomes Alberta-wide; c) rank orders Alberta hospitals based on rates of hospitalization; d) documents therapeutic practices in 24 selected Alberta hospitals; and e) documents, through the use of a prospectively administered survey, the psychosocial burden of the disease on families in the same 24 Alberta hospitals.
  2. We are developing clinical guidelines that address indications for drug therapy and hospital admission/discharge criteria. Development of these guidelines have included the following: a)convening an expert panel; b) critically reviewing the published literature; c) drafting guidelines which meet standard criteria for developing guidelines; d) obtaining approval of the guidelines by the Canadian Pediatric Society, Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, and the Alberta Medical Association; and e) publishing the guidelines in journals such as the CMAJ.
  3. We have identified 24 Alberta hospitals and will randomize them to one of the three dissemination strategies outlined above.
  4. We will complete a follow-up survey which a) documents Alberta-wide severe adverse outcomes and utilization rates; b) documents practice patterns in the same 24 Alberta hospitals surveyed at baseline; and c) documents the psychosocial burden of the disease on families in these same hospitals.
  5. We will complete a statistical analysis comparing the three randomized groups of hospitals in terms of the change in health care utilization, change in physician use of effective therapies, and change in the psychosocial burden of the disease on families.
  6. We will complete an economic analysis that compares the change in benefits derived from the three types of dissemination strategies with the relative costs (change in health care costs, relative costs associated with the three types of dissemination strategies, and change in costs borne by the family such as lost wages).
Conditions
Croup
Being tested
mailing of printed educational materials, a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders, identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processes
Keywords
knowledge translation, health care utilization, economic analysis
Medical subject headings
Croup, Patient Acceptance of Health Care

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • mailing of printed educational materialsBehavioural

  • a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and remindersBehavioural

  • identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processesBehavioural

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Rate of hospital days per 1,000 disease episodes

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Proportion of patients treated in the ED and hospital with a corticosteroid.

  2. Proportion of patients evaluated in ED for at least three hours after treatment with corticosteroids before the decision to admit to hospital is made.

  3. Time to treatment with corticosteroids in both ED and hospital patients.

  4. An economic analysis conducted from a societal perspective with costs classified as either payer (costs born by the province) or non-payer (costs born by individuals or the families of children with croup).

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted7 Sep 2005 (estimated)
  2. Study startSep 2000
  3. Study completionMar 2006

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Early clinical test
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00147849
Sponsor's protocol ID
MCT-63141
Other IDs
CIHR App No. 110642, U Calgary Acct. No. 73-1051
Status last verified
Sep 2005
First submitted
2 Sep 2005
Last updated
29 Nov 2005
Results posted
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing mailing of printed educational materials, a combination of interactive educational meetings, educational outreach visits, and reminders and identification of local opinion leaders and establishment of local consensus processes in people with Croup, run by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR).

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Nov 2005. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study was stopped early. Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Rate of hospital days per 1,000 disease episodes. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Nov 2005.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in