Brain InjuryNCT02023138
Evaluation of the Acceptability, Feasibility and Effectiveness of Two Methods of Involvement of Patients With Cognitive Disability in Clinical Guidelines Development: a Randomized Crossover Pilot Trial
A study testing Focus group and Wiki in people with Brain Injury, run by Laval University at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
There is a lack of evidence about the best method to involve the patient and population (IPP) into clinical practice guidelines (CPG) development. The goal of this pilot study is to document the acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of two methods for the implication of patients with a traumatic brain injury… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Brain Injury
- What is being tested?
- Focus group and Wiki
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Jan 2014to Mar 2014
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- having suffered a moderate-to-severe TBI (Glascow Coma Scale <13)
- living with a TBI for two to four years
- French-speaking
- able to use a computer
- able to participate in a two-hour group meeting
Who cannot join
- None
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site
Association de personnes TCC du Québec
Québec, Quebec
Valérie Plamondon, B.Sc.
About this study
There is a lack of evidence about the best method to involve the patient and population (IPP) into clinical practice guidelines (CPG) development. The goal of this pilot study is to document the acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of two methods for the implication of patients with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) in CPG development. Method: A single blind, randomized crossover trial will be performed with patients having a TBI. Participants: A convenience sample of 20 patients a) with a moderate-to-severe TBI (Glascow Coma Scale <13), b) living with a TBI for two to four years, c) French-speaking, d) able to use a computer and e) able to participate in a two-hour group meeting will be recruited among the members of the Associations TCC Des Deux Rives. Procedures: The patients will first receive a in-person training on guidelines and IPP. They will be randomized into Group 1 or Group 2 by a researcher blinded to experimentation. They will experiment either group discussion (control intervention) or a Wiki (experimental intervention). Phase 1: A week after the training, Group 1 participants will be invited to a discussion group animated by an experimented moderator, where they will be asked to discuss a CPG recommendation chosen by the research team in an existing CPG. The participants will be asked : 1) about their opinion of the recommendation; 2) if they have a preference in regard to the recommendation ; 3) if they have some modification, correction or addition to bring to this recommendation. In the mean time, Group 2 participants will receive an email presenting a link to a Wiki. They will be invited to answer the same three questions as Group 1, but using a Wiki platform. The patients will have a week to interact and answer the questions; recalls could be sent by email if required. At the end of Phase 1, participants of both groups will fill a questionnaire documenting the acceptability of the method experimented. Phase 2: As per the crossover design, the Group 1 participants will then be assigned to the Wiki intervention and the Group 2 participants will be assigned to the discussion group intervention. The procedure will be repeated with a second recommendation. At the end of Phase 2, the patients will be asked to answer a short survey to validate their preferences about the two methods. Tools: The acceptability of the methods will be evaluated with a questionnaire adapted from Sidani and al. and validated with three TBI individuals. The feasibility of the intervention will be evaluated using a) the number of participants who reached the group or the Wiki, b) the number of participants who completed the intervention c) the number of support interventions required in the group and in the Wiki. The effectiveness of the two methods will be evaluated by submitting the adapted recommendations to a panel of expert clinicians evaluators blinded to the methodologies of recommendations adaptation. They will be invited to rate the clarity, accuracy, appropriateness and usefulness of the recommendations. Analysis: Feasibility indicators will be reported using descriptive statistics. Within-subject analysis using non-parametric statistics will be performed to assess the acceptability of the two methods. AC1 coefficient of raters' agreement will be calculated on the expert evaluation scores, and the effectiveness of the methods will be compared using appropriate non parametric statistics to. Impact: This pilot trial will be the first one to evaluate methodologies for involving disabled individuals into CPG development.
- Conditions
- Brain Injury
- Being tested
- Focus group, Wiki
- Keywords
- Clinical practice guideline, Brain injury, Acceptability, Feasibility, Effectiveness
- Medical subject headings
- Brain Injuries
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Focus groupOther
Two hours focus group to allow the participants to modify a clinical practice guideline recommendation
WikiOther
A specially tailored interactive communication website (Wiki) to allow the participants to modify a clinical practice guideline recommendation
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Focus group | Active comparator | Not described Receives: Other: Focus group; Other: Wiki |
| Wiki | Experimental | Not described Receives: Other: Focus group; Other: Wiki |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Acceptability
The acceptability of the method will be evaluated through individual questionnaire administred seven days after having make the wiki available, or immediatly after the focus group.
Measured: Immediatly (less than 12 hours) after the intervention, at the end of week 2 and week 3.
Feasibility
The feasability will be assed by considering the number of participants reaching and using each method, and by recording the number of support intervention required for the use of each method.
Measured: At the end of the experimentation of the two methods (end of week 3)
Effectiveness
After the adaptation of the two recommendations using the two methods, twenty experts, blind to the method used to formulate the recommendations, will rate each recommendation for its clarity, accuracy, appropriateness and usefulness of the recommendations using 10 points likert scales. An electronic questionnaire will be send to the experts and they will have one week to rate the recommendations.
Measured: Within one month after the experimentation of the two methods.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2014
- Primary completionMar 2014 (estimated)
- Study completionMar 2014 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Brain InjuryStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Laval UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Laval University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Marie-Eve Lamontagne, Laval University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02023138
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- KT Canada 87776
- Status last verified
- Dec 2013
- First submitted
- 17 Dec 2013
- Last updated
- 30 Dec 2013
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Lamontagne ME, Gagnon MP, Perreault K, Gauthier V. Evaluating the Acceptability, Feasibility, and Outcomes of Two Methods Involving Patients With Disability in Developing Clinical Guidelines: Crossover Pilot Study. J Particip Med. 2021 Nov 23;13(3):e24319. doi: 10.2196/24319.
PubMed 34812733
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Dec 2013. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of the Acceptability, Feasibility and Effectiveness of Two Methods of Involvement of Patients With Cognitive Disability in Clinical Guidelines Development: a Randomized Crossover Pilot Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02023138
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- KT Canada 87776
- Conditions
- Brain Injury
- Keywords
- Clinical practice guideline, Brain injury, Acceptability, Feasibility, Effectiveness
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Laval UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2014
- Primary completion
- Mar 2014 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Mar 2014 (estimated)
- First posted
- 30 Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
There is a lack of evidence about the best method to involve the patient and population (IPP) into clinical practice guidelines (CPG) development. The goal of this pilot study is to document the acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of two methods for the implication of patients with a traumatic brain injury (TBI) in CPG development. Method: A single blind, randomized crossover trial will be performed with patients having a TBI. Participants: A convenience sample of 20 patients a) with a moderate-to-severe TBI (Glascow Coma Scale <13), b) living with a TBI for two to four years, c) French-speaking, d) able to use a computer and e) able to participate in a two-hour group meeting will be recruited among the members of the Associations TCC Des Deux Rives. Procedures: The patients will first receive a in-person training on guidelines and IPP. They will be randomized into Group 1 or Group 2 by a researcher blinded to experimentation. They will experiment either group discussion (control intervention) or a Wiki (experimental intervention). Phase 1: A week after the training, Group 1 participants will be invited to a discussion group animated by an experimented moderator, where they will be asked to discuss a CPG recommendation chosen by the research team in an existing CPG. The participants will be asked : 1) about their opinion of the recommendation; 2) if they have a preference in regard to the recommendation ; 3) if they have some modification, correction or addition to bring to this recommendation. In the mean time, Group 2 participants will receive an email presenting a link to a Wiki. They will be invited to answer the same three questions as Group 1, but using a Wiki platform. The patients will have a week to interact and answer the questions; recalls could be sent by email if required. At the end of Phase 1, participants of both groups will fill a questionnaire documenting the acceptability of the method experimented. Phase 2: As per the crossover design, the Group 1 participants will then be assigned to the Wiki intervention and the Group 2 participants will be assigned to the discussion group intervention. The procedure will be repeated with a second recommendation. At the end of Phase 2, the patients will be asked to answer a short survey to validate their preferences about the two methods. Tools: The acceptability of the methods will be evaluated with a questionnaire adapted from Sidani and al. and validated with three TBI individuals. The feasibility of the intervention will be evaluated using a) the number of participants who reached the group or the Wiki, b) the number of participants who completed the intervention c) the number of support interventions required in the group and in the Wiki. The effectiveness of the two methods will be evaluated by submitting the adapted recommendations to a panel of expert clinicians evaluators blinded to the methodologies of recommendations adaptation. They will be invited to rate the clarity, accuracy, appropriateness and usefulness of the recommendations. Analysis: Feasibility indicators will be reported using descriptive statistics. Within-subject analysis using non-parametric statistics will be performed to assess the acceptability of the two methods. AC1 coefficient of raters' agreement will be calculated on the expert evaluation scores, and the effectiveness of the methods will be compared using appropriate non parametric statistics to. Impact: This pilot trial will be the first one to evaluate methodologies for involving disabled individuals into CPG development.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Focus group | Active comparator | Other: Focus group, Other: Wiki |
| Wiki | Experimental | Other: Focus group, Other: Wiki |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- having suffered a moderate-to-severe TBI (Glascow Coma Scale <13)
- living with a TBI for two to four years
- French-speaking
- able to use a computer
- able to participate in a two-hour group meeting
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- None
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Focus groupTwo hours focus group to allow the participants to modify a clinical practice guideline recommendation | Other | Focus group, Wiki |
| WikiA specially tailored interactive communication website (Wiki) to allow the participants to modify a clinical practice guideline recommendation | Other | Focus group, Wiki |
Primary outcome
Acceptability
Time frame: Immediatly (less than 12 hours) after the intervention, at the end of week 2 and week 3.
The acceptability of the method will be evaluated through individual questionnaire administred seven days after having make the wiki available, or immediatly after the focus group.
Feasibility
Time frame: At the end of the experimentation of the two methods (end of week 3)
The feasability will be assed by considering the number of participants reaching and using each method, and by recording the number of support intervention required for the use of each method.
Effectiveness
Time frame: Within one month after the experimentation of the two methods.
After the adaptation of the two recommendations using the two methods, twenty experts, blind to the method used to formulate the recommendations, will rate each recommendation for its clarity, accuracy, appropriateness and usefulness of the recommendations using 10 points likert scales. An electronic questionnaire will be send to the experts and they will have one week to rate the recommendations.
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Dec 2013.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 34812733Lamontagne ME, Gagnon MP, Perreault K, Gauthier V. Evaluating the Acceptability, Feasibility, and Outcomes of Two Methods Involving Patients With Disability in Developing Clinical Guidelines: Crossover Pilot Study. J Particip Med. 2021 Nov 23;13(3):e24319. doi: 10.2196/24319.
Related trials for Brain Injury
Not yet recruiting
Feasibility of a Robot-Guided Active Play Intervention for Children With Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Additional Effects on tDCS With AOT on Lower Limb Functions on Children With Diplegic CP
Diplegic Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Sensory Integration Therapy vs Conventional Physical Therapy in Children With Mixed Cerebral Palsy
Cerebral Palsy
Recruiting
Telerehabilitation Compared With Clinic-Based Physiotherapy in Children With Spastic Cerebral Palsy
Spastic Cerebral Palsy
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Epileptogenesis Project (TRACK-TBI EPI)
Traumatic Brain Injury, Post-traumatic Epilepsy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Focus group and Wiki in people with Brain Injury, run by Laval University at 1 site in Canada.
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 5 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Dec 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Marie-Eve Lamontagne, Ph.D. (418-529-9141 ext. 2423, marie-eve.lamontagne@cirris.ulaval.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Acceptability (time frame: Immediatly (less than 12 hours) after the intervention, at the end of week 2 and week 3.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02023138, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 30 Dec 2013.