Evaluation of the Effectiveness of an Audit and Feedback Intervention With Quality Improvement Toolbox in Intensive Care

January 9, 2019 updated by: Prof. dr. Nicolette F. de Keizer, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)

Increasing the Effectiveness and Understanding of Audit and Feedback Interventions in Intensive Care: Protocol for a Mixed-methods Study

This study evaluates the addition of a quality improvement toolbox to an online audit and feedback intervention in Dutch intensive care units. The toolbox comprises for each quality indicator (e.g., percentage of patients per shift whose pain is measured) a list of potential bottlenecks in the care process (e.g., staff is unaware of the prevailing guidelines for measuring pain every shift), associated recommendations for actions to solve mentioned bottlenecks (e.g., organize an educational training session), and supporting materials to facilitate implementation of the actions (e.g., a slide show presentation discussing the importance and relevance of measuring pain every shift). Half of the participating intensive care units will only receive online feedback, while the other half will additionally gain access to the integrated toolbox to facilitate planning and executing actions.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
21

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Netherlands
    • Noord-Holland
      • Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands, 1100 EC
        • National Intensive Care Evaluation foundation

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • ICUs treating adult (18 years and above) patients
  • ICUs willing and able to submit data monthly
  • ICUs with a local quality improvement team of at least 1 intensivist and 1 nurse

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Nil

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Audit and Feedback with toolbox
Access to an online dashboard that provides insight into clinical performance on quality indicators for pain management; including a quality improvement toolbox to facilitate planning and executing actions. Participating ICUs will receive one educational outreach visit and brief monthly telephone calls.
Behavioral: Audit and Feedback
An online dashboard that provides insight into clinical performance on pain management quality indicators. It also incorporates an empty action plan, in which participating intensive care units can define potential bottlenecks in the care process and what actions they intend to undertake to improve.
Other Names:
  • Feedback
  • A&F
Behavioral: Toolbox
A quality improvement toolbox, incorporated within the action plan, that comprises for each pain management quality indicator (e.g., percentage of patients per shift whose pain is measured) a list of potential bottlenecks in the care process (e.g., staff is unaware of the prevailing guidelines for measuring pain every shift), associated recommendations for actions to solve mentioned bottlenecks (e.g., organize an educational training session), and supporting materials to facilitate implementation of the actions (e.g., a slide show presentation discussing the importance and relevance of measuring pain every shift).
Other Names:
  • Quality Improvement Toolbox
Active Comparator: Audit and Feedback without toolbox
Same intervention, but without access to the quality improvement toolbox.
Behavioral: Audit and Feedback
An online dashboard that provides insight into clinical performance on pain management quality indicators. It also incorporates an empty action plan, in which participating intensive care units can define potential bottlenecks in the care process and what actions they intend to undertake to improve.
Other Names:
  • Feedback
  • A&F

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change from proportion of patient shifts during which pain has been adequately managed
Time Frame: 9 months
"Adequately managed" is defined: pain measured AND (acceptable pain score OR (unacceptable pain score AND normalized within 1 hour)). The primary outcome measure is a composite score of four quality indicators (= secondary outcome measures).The measure is limited to only patients' first 12 shifts to prevent bias from patients with a long stay. There are 3 shifts in 1 day.
9 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Time Frame
Change from proportion of patient shifts during which pain was measured at least once
Time Frame: 9 months
9 months
Change from proportion of patient shifts during which pain was measured and no unacceptable pain scores were observed
Time Frame: 9 months
9 months
Change from proportion of patient shifts during which an unacceptable pain score was measured, and pain was timely re-measured
Time Frame: 9 months
9 months
Change from proportion of patient shifts during which an unacceptable pain score was measured, and pain was timely re-measured indicating that the pain score was normalized
Time Frame: 9 months
9 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
National Intensive Care Evaluation Foundation

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Nicolette F de Keizer, PhD, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
September 1, 2016

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
October 1, 2018

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
October 1, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
September 26, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
October 3, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
October 4, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
January 10, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 9, 2019

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • METC_W16_271

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

Yes

IPD Plan Description

The National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) foundation has a policy for sharing data among its participating ICUs.

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings