Sustainability of a Knowledge Translation Intervention to Improve Paediatric Pain

Pain Clinical Trial

Official title:

Sustainability of a Multidimensional Knowledge Translation Intervention to Improve Paediatric Pain Practices and Outcomes

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT02236949
• Other study ID #: 1000026324
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: September 5, 2014
• Last updated: May 21, 2015
• Start date: September 2011
• Est. completion date: June 2014

Study information

• Verified date: May 2015
• Source: The Hospital for Sick Children
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Health authority: Canada: Ethics Review Committee
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of this research study is to evaluate the effectiveness of short refresher sessions. "Pain Practice Change Boosters" given at regular intervals to sustain improved pain process (assessment and management) and clinical outcomes (pain intensity) achieved during a 15 month knowledge translation intervention, Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality (EPIQ), in 8 children's hospitals in Canada; and to determine the factors that affect that sustainability. The CIHR Team in Children's Pain (2006-2011) evaluated the effectiveness of the EPIQ intervention in 32 hospital units (4 units at each hospital site). 16 hospital units were allocated to the intervention group and 16 units continued with standard care. The current study focuses on the 16 hospital units that implemented the EPIQ intervention only.

Description:

This is an 8 hospital repeated measures Randomized Controlled Trial design using a centrally controlled cluster random allocation of units with stratification by hospital. The sample consisted of the 16 hospital units that implemented the EPIQ intervention in the CIHR Team in Children's Pain study. Randomization was restricted so there was one intervention unit and one standard care unit at each site. Outcomes were measured at 3 time points:12 months after the completion of the EPIQ intervention: Baseline (Time 1); 12 months following the implementation of the Booster intervention (Time 2); and 36 months following the implementation of the Booster intervention (Time 3), including the frequency and proportion of children receiving pain assessment and management strategies, children's pain intensity during painful procedures, and health care professionals' perceptions of the context of sustainability.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 3907
• Est. completion date: June 2014
• Est. primary completion date: June 2014
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: Both
• Age group: N/A and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

Hospitals met the following inclusion criteria in at least four patient care units:

• distinct geographic location and administrative structure;

• minimum of 15 beds per unit;

• care for children exposed to painful procedures for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes; and

• implementation of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to manage pain.

The 16 participating hospital units had implemented the EPIQ intervention in the CIHR Team in Children's Pain study. Patients in the participating hospital units were eligible to be included in the determination of the pain practice and clinical outcomes if they:

• were between 32 weeks gestational age at birth and 18 years;

• received skin breaking procedures; and

• were admitted to the unit for >24 hours.

Surveys used to determine factors influencing sustainability were administered to health care professionals in all participating units, who had at least 1 year of professional experience, had worked on the unit for at least 6 months, and spoke English or French.

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Open Label, Primary Purpose: Health Services Research

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Pain

Intervention

Behavioral:
• Pain Practice Change Booster Intervention
See experimental arm for a description of the intervention

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Canada	Stollery Chidlren's Hospital	Edmonton	Alberta
Canada	IWK Health Centre	Halifax	Nova Scotia
Canada	CHU St. Justine	Montreal	Quebec
Canada	Montreal Children's Hospital	Montreal	Quebec
Canada	Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario	Ottawa	Ontario
Canada	BC Children's Hospital	Vancouver	British Columbia
Canada	Children's Hospital Winnipeg	Winnipeg	Manitoba

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
The Hospital for Sick Children

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Canada, 

References & Publications (4)

Estabrooks CA, Squires JE, Hutchinson AM, Scott S, Cummings GG, Kang SH, Midodzi WK, Stevens B. Assessment of variation in the Alberta Context Tool: the contribution of unit level contextual factors and specialty in Canadian pediatric acute care settings. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011 Oct 4;11:251. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-251. — View Citation

Stevens BJ, Abbott LK, Yamada J, Harrison D, Stinson J, Taddio A, Barwick M, Latimer M, Scott SD, Rashotte J, Campbell F, Finley GA; CIHR Team in Children's Pain. Epidemiology and management of painful procedures in children in Canadian hospitals. CMAJ. 2011 Apr 19;183(7):E403-10. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.101341. Epub 2011 Apr 4. — View Citation

Stevens BJ, Harrison D, Rashotte J, Yamada J, Abbott LK, Coburn G, Stinson J, Le May S; CIHR Team in Children's Pain. Pain assessment and intensity in hospitalized children in Canada. J Pain. 2012 Sep;13(9):857-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2012.05.010. — View Citation

Stevens BJ, Yamada J, Estabrooks CA, Stinson J, Campbell F, Scott SD, Cummings G; CIHR Team in Children’s Pain. Pain in hospitalized children: Effect of a multidimensional knowledge translation strategy on pain process and clinical outcomes. Pain. 2014 Jan;155(1):60-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.09.007. Epub 2013 Sep 8. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)	Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit whose pain was assessed and whether a validated pain measure was used. Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).	T1 (Baseline)	No
Primary	Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)	The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) (Estabrooks, 2011) was used to determine the factors that influence sustainability in each of the 16 participating hospital units, including organizational culture, leadership, readiness to change, organizational complexity, professional autonomy and support within the workplace. The ACT measures health care professionals' perceptions of these contextual factors at the unit and institutional levels. The tool was administered in survey form to staff on the participating units at 3 time points.	T1 (Baseline)	No
Primary	Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)	Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit whose pain was assessed and whether a validated pain measure was used. Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).	T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Primary	Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)	Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit whose pain was assessed and whether a validated pain measure was used. Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).	T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Primary	Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)	The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was used to determine the factors that influence sustainability in each of the 16 participating hospital units, including organizational culture, leadership, readiness to change, organizational complexity, professional autonomy and support within the workplace. The ACT measures health care professionals' perceptions of these contextual factors at the unit and institutional levels. The tool was administered in survey form to staff on the participating units at 3 time points.	T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Primary	Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)	The Alberta Context Tool (ACT) was used to determine the factors that influence sustainability in each of the 16 participating hospital units, including organizational culture, leadership, readiness to change, organizational complexity, professional autonomy and support within the workplace. The ACT measures health care professionals' perceptions of these contextual factors at the unit and institutional levels. The tool was administered in survey form to staff on the participating units at 3 time points.	T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Primary	Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)	Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit who had painful procedures: (i) without pain management interventions, (ii) with pharmacological interventions, and (iii) with non-pharmacological interventions (i.e., physical or psychological). Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).	T1 (Baseline)	No
Primary	Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)	Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit who had painful procedures: (i) without pain management interventions, (ii) with pharmacological interventions, and (iii) with non-pharmacological interventions (i.e., physical or psychological). Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).	T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Primary	Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)	Pain process outcomes included the proportion of children per unit who had painful procedures: (i) without pain management interventions, (ii) with pharmacological interventions, and (iii) with non-pharmacological interventions (i.e., physical or psychological). Data were collected from 30 patient charts on each unit for the previous 24 hours at 3 time points, using the Canadian Pediatric Pain Research (CPPR) database, which was used and validated in previous studies (Stevens, 2011, 2012, 2014).	T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Secondary	Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity	Pain intensity was measured through patient observation during routinely scheduled painful procedures at 3 time points, using one of four validated, age-appropriate measures: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) (Stevens et al., 1996) Faces-Legs-Arms-Cry-Consolability Scale (FLACC) (Merkel et al., 1997), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (Hicks et al., 2001), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (Jensen et a., 1986). Data were collected by local pain experts, experienced pediatric clinicians, who were trained on the four measures to ensure accurate and standardized use.	T1 (Baseline)	No
Secondary	Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity	Pain intensity was measured through patient observation during routinely scheduled painful procedures at 3 time points, using one of four validated, age-appropriate measures: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) (Stevens et al., 1996) Faces-Legs-Arms-Cry-Consolability Scale (FLACC) (Merkel et al., 1997), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (Hicks et al., 2001), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (Jensen et a., 1986). Data were collected by local pain experts, experienced pediatric clinicians, who were trained on the four measures to ensure accurate and standardized use.	T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No
Secondary	Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity	Pain intensity was measured through patient observation during routinely scheduled painful procedures at 3 time points, using one of four validated, age-appropriate measures: Premature Infant Pain Profile (PIPP) (Stevens et al., 1996) Faces-Legs-Arms-Cry-Consolability Scale (FLACC) (Merkel et al., 1997), Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R) (Hicks et al., 2001), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) (Jensen et a., 1986). Data were collected by local pain experts, experienced pediatric clinicians, who were trained on the four measures to ensure accurate and standardized use.	T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)	No