Educating Nurses About Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) Prevention

May 16, 2019 updated by: Johns Hopkins University

Educating Nurses About Venous Thromboembolism Prevention

As part of mandatory on-going nursing education, the investigators have incorporated identical information into two distinct web-based learning formats - the traditional linear PowerPoint format (with voice-over) and a new interactive format developed with central nursing education.

The investigators will cluster randomize nurses by floor to receive either the traditional education or the new interactive education, and evaluate the impact on administration of VTE prophylaxis doses administered by nurses before and after education. All nurses on a floor will receive the same educational format. If one method of education results in statistically significant improvement in VTE prophylaxis administration, the investigators will cross over to deliver the superior education format to all nurses who originally were given the less effective method.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

BACKGROUND

  • In an attempt to improve venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis adherence the investigators carried out qualitative studies to obtain patients' viewpoints on how nurses should be educated about VTE prevention and to assess nurses' beliefs and perceptions about pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis
  • The investigators observed deficiencies in nurses' knowledge and misconceptions about VTE prophylaxis that likely lowers adherence to administration of prescribed VTE prophylaxis doses
  • As a part of our original Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) proposal, the investigators planned to educate nurses to address the observed deficiencies and misconceptions and improve their ability to communicate effectively with patients

    • Historically, nurse education has been done via a linear, PowerPoint-based platform with voice-over but with no interactive component (TRADITIONAL)
    • A newer platform for nurse education became available for use and includes scenario-based teaching, ongoing assessment, and immediate remediation. Most importantly, it is a highly interactive product (CONTEMPORARY)

STUDY DESIGN AND ANALYTIC PLAN

  • Research hypotheses

    • Primary: Nurse participants who receive either of these interventions will improve administration of prescribed VTE prophylaxis evidenced by a decrease in frequency of non-administered doses of VTE prophylaxis, compared with their frequency at baseline.
    • Secondary: Nurse participants who receive the contemporary education format will have a larger decrease in frequency of missed doses of VTE prophylaxis compared with those who participate in the traditional education format.
  • Study Design

    • Cluster Randomized Trial 21 floors, block randomized by floor type (medicine [n=11] vs. surgery [n=10]) and (ICU [n=5] vs. non-ICU [n=16]) All nurses on each floor are assigned the same education type to mitigate issues related to contamination if nurses discuss the education with their colleagues
  • Primary Outcome measure: Proportion of non-administered doses of pharmacological VTE prophylaxis (dose level)
  • Secondary Outcome Measures:

    • Proportion of doses documented as missed due to patient refusal (dose level)
    • Proportion of patients with any VTE (patient level)
    • Proportion of patients with Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) (patient level)
    • Proportion of patients with Pulmonary Embolism (PE) (patient level)
  • Analytic methods

    • Primary analyses - Intention-to-treat (includes all nurses assigned, whether or not they completed the education) Is there a difference between units allocated to either of the interventions comparing their outcome measure to their baseline measure? Is there a difference comparing those who received the contemporary education format vs. the traditional education format?
    • Secondary analysis - Per protocol (includes only nurses who completed the education) Do nurses who receive education perform better (improved administration of prescribed VTE prophylaxis) than those who did not? Do nurses who received the education in the contemporary format perform better than those who received it in the traditional format

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

933

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

    • Maryland
      • Baltimore, Maryland, United States, 21287
        • Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions

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:

  • Nurses on selected surgical and medical floors at Johns Hopkins Hospital

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Nurses who were not permanently associated with one of the 21 hospital floors (e.g. traveling nurse, float nurse) were excluded from this study

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: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Contemporary Education Format

Nurses in this arm received education about venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a web-based contemporary interactive format.

Intervention: Nurse education in contemporary format

Education about VTE was delivered through a web-based contemporary interactive format
Active Comparator: Traditional Education Format

Nurses in this arm received education about venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a web-based traditional linear PowerPoint format with voice over.

Intervention: Nurse education in traditional format

Education about VTE was delivered through a web-based traditional linear Powerpoint format with voice over.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Non Administration of Prescribed VTE Prophylaxis Medication Doses
Time Frame: (Baseline); approximately 3 months later (Post-Education)
This is the percentage of VTE prophylaxis doses that were not administered for any reason as documented in the electronic health record by a nurse
(Baseline); approximately 3 months later (Post-Education)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Rates of All VTE Among Hospitalized Patients
Time Frame: 3-12 months after end of study
Did the intervention decrease rates of VTE among hospitalized patients?
3-12 months after end of study
Rates of Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) Among Hospitalized Patients
Time Frame: 3-12 months after end of study
Did the intervention decrease rates of DVT among hospitalized patients?
3-12 months after end of study
Rates of Pulmonary Embolism (PE) Among Hospitalized Patients
Time Frame: 3-12 months after end of study
Did the intervention decrease rates of PE among hospitalized patients?
3-12 months after end of study
Proportion of Non Administration of Prescribed VTE Prophylaxis Medication Doses Which Are Documented as Patient Refusal
Time Frame: Baseline; approximately 3 months later (post education)
Did the intervention decrease rates of patient refusal of VTE prophylaxis medication doses among hospitalized patients?
Baseline; approximately 3 months later (post education)

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Elliott R Haut, MD PhD, Johns Hopkins University

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 (Actual)

April 1, 2014

Primary Completion (Actual)

March 31, 2015

Study Completion (Actual)

March 31, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 22, 2014

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 25, 2014

First Posted (Estimate)

November 26, 2014

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

May 17, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 16, 2019

Last Verified

May 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Venous Thrombosis

Clinical Trials on Nurse education in contemporary format

3
Subscribe