Sustainability of a Knowledge Translation Intervention to Improve Paediatric Pain

May 21, 2015 updated by: Bonnie Stevens, The Hospital for Sick Children

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

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.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed 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.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

3907

Phase

  • 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

    • Alberta
      • Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2G3
        • Stollery Chidlren's Hospital
    • British Columbia
      • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6H 3V4
        • BC Children's Hospital
    • Manitoba
      • Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3A 1S1
        • Children's Hospital Winnipeg
    • Nova Scotia
      • Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, B3H 3J5
        • IWK Health Centre
    • Ontario
      • Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L1
        • Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
    • Quebec
      • Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3H 1P3
        • Montreal Children's Hospital
      • Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3T 1C5
        • CHU St. Justine

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

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

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 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: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Pain Practice Change Booster
Pain Practice Change Booster Intervention: 12 months after the EPIQ intervention, and every 4 months for 2 years, a 30-60 minute standardized booster session was delivered to a small group of champions in each hospital unit randomized to the intervention group. Two co-facilitators familiar with the EPIQ intervention conducted all booster sessions via teleconference. Booster sessions included reviewing the effectiveness knowledge translation strategies champions implemented over the past four months to sustain and improve targeted pain practices; determining the sustainability of the pain practice changes, developing a commitment to change plan of action for the next four months.
See experimental arm for a description of the intervention
No Intervention: Usual Care Group
No interventions associated with the study were conducted on these units.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline)
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)
Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline)
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)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)
Time Frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain assessment)
Time Frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)
Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)
Time Frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)
Factors Influencing Sustainability: The Alberta Context Tool (ACT)
Time Frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline)
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)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)
Time Frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)
Pain Process Outcomes (pain management)
Time Frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity
Time Frame: T1 (Baseline)
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)
Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity
Time Frame: T2 (12 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)
Clinical Pain Outcome: Pain Intensity
Time Frame: T3 (24 months following the implementation of the Booster)
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)

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Bonnie Stevens, RN, PhD, The Hospital for Sick Children

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.

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

September 1, 2011

Primary Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2014

Study Completion (Actual)

June 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

September 5, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

September 10, 2014

First Posted (Estimate)

September 11, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

May 22, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 21, 2015

Last Verified

May 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 1000026324

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.

Clinical Trials on Pain

Clinical Trials on Pain Practice Change Booster Intervention

3
Subscribe