Evaluating a Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC) Implementation Process (Val_CEC)

March 3, 2023 updated by: Marta Perin, Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale Reggio Emilia

Evaluation of a Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC) Implementation Process in an Oncological Research Hospital. A Process Evaluation Study Using Normalization Process Theory

This is a Mixed-method study with retrospective quantitative assessment and prospective qualitative evaluation focused on the development and implementation of a multidisciplinary Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC), 16 months from its implementation.

A CEC is a multi-professionals service that aims to support healthcare professionals (HPs) and healthcare organizations in dealing with ethical issues of clinical practice, providing also ethics consultations (EC) for complex clinical cases, characterized by conflicting ethical perspectives.

In 2020, a CEC was established in an Oncology Research Hospital in the North of Italy. It was developed and implemented according to the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the CEC's development and implementation process, after 16 months it entered into force.

Study's hypothesis: the investigators expect to identify the relevant components that contribute to the CEC's successful implementation and integration into everyday practice. Findings would also identify required modifications to improve the service and develop practical strategies for enabling and sustaining the CEC delivery in clinical settings.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

The investigators will combine quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data on crucial process variables, from sites or participants purposively selected along such elements expected to influence the intervention's functioning.

The study consists of a quantitative and qualitative evaluation.

Quantitative evaluation. It aims to assess the CEC's activities performed within 16 months since its implementation and the spread, use, and knowledge of the service by all the HPs employed at the Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia. These data will be used to examine the quantity of intervention implemented, and whether and how the intended audience came into contact with the intervention.

Data related to the amount of CEC activities will be collected by the internal database developed by the CEC Secretariat. Moreover, to collect data on the level of knowledge, use, and dissemination of the CEC, a closed-ended questions survey will be disseminated among all the HPs employed at the Oncology Research Hospital. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive techniques.

Qualitative Evaluation. The qualitative evaluation aims to investigate mechanisms of impact and contextual factors among several groups of stakeholders, differently involved in designing, promoting, delivering, and benefitting the CEC. The Normalization Process Theory (NPT) will be applied to determine if, and in what ways, the CEC can be successfully 'normalized' into clinical practice. NPT is a theory aimed at identifying, characterizing, and explaining the empirically identifiable mechanism that motivates and shapes the implementation process of a complex intervention by four conceptual tools (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring). The NPT will inform the data collection tools of the qualitative part and will be used as a framework for data analysis.

Semi-structured interviews will be performed with different groups of stakeholders. The interviews' topics concern the 4 concepts of the NPT. A specific interview track will be developed for each interviewed group. Moreover, a second online survey will be sent to HPs who have attended at least 1 of the 5 editions of the ethics training promoted by the CEC. The survey will consist of 20 multiple-choice questions, also based on the constructs of the NPT, and will be supplemented by free-text questions aimed at assessing: the acceptability of the CEC within the local context and understanding additional needs and expectations about the service. Qualitative data will be thematically analyzed. After an initial inductive analysis of the qualitative data, the NPT concepts will be applied to the emerging themes to confirm or refine the results.

Ethical Considerations. Eligible subjects may only be included in the study after providing written informed consent. No study procedure can be performed before it has been provided.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Anticipated)

30

Contacts and Locations

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

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

    • Italia
      • Reggio Emilia, Italia, Italy
        • Recruiting
        • Azienda USL-IRCCS Di Reggio Emilia
        • Contact:

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

18 years to 75 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Participants will be selected from Healthcare professionals employed at the local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • being a healthcare professionals (HPs) (physicians, therapists, nurses, social workers, healthcare researcher, pharmacist..)
  • being an HPs employed at the Health Care Authority of Reggio Emilia;

Participants will be included in the qualitative evaluation if they:

  • are working as a Head of Departments / local Manager at the Local health Authority of Reggio Emilia, and have been contacted by the CEC's President during the dissemination process;
  • have been a member of the CEC in the last 16 months;
  • submitted at least 1 ethics consultation request;
  • participated to at least 1 of the 5 training courses on ethics consultation promoted by the CEC

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

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Healthcare Professionals (HPs) employed at the Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia,
HPs will be included if they are employed at the Health Care Authority of Reggio Emilia. They will receive a closed-ended questions survey.
Closed-ended survey on the level of knowledge, use, and dissemination of the CEC.
Local Health Authority's Managers/Wards Heads
Managers/Heads who formally supported and promoted the intervention or have been contacted during the dissemination process will be interviewed by semi-structured interview.
the semi-structured interview concerns participants'motivations/expectations for implementing CEC, personal attitude towards the service, experience with CEC in terms of facilitators, problems, and critical evaluation on the service delivered
Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC)'s members
CEC's members will be interviewed by semi-structured interview.
semi-structured interview concerns participants motivations and expectations to be a member of the CEC, personal attitude towards the service, experience with CEC in terms of facilitators, problems, and critical evaluation on the service delivered.
Healthcare Professionals who submitted an ethics consultation request
Healthcare Professionals who submitted an ethics consultation request will be interviewed by semi-structured interview.
semi-structured interview concerns participants' experiences with the ethics consultation service provide by the Clinical Ethics Committee
Healthcare Professionals who attended the training provided by the Clinical Ethics Committee
Healthcare Professionals who attended at least one of the five training courses on ethics consultation provided by the Clinical Ethics Committee. They will receive a survey of 20 multiple-choice questions and supplemented by free-text questions.
survey of 20 multiple-choice questions and supplemented by free-text questions.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Process Evaluation by a quantitative, closed-ended questions surveys and semi-structured interviews with different groups of the Clinical Ethics Committee (CEC)'s stakeholders.
Time Frame: 16 months from the service implementation
The evaluation of the development and implementation process of the CEC will be assessed quantitatively by assessing the activity of the CEC and its diffusions, knowledge and utilization among HPs, while qualitatively, by collecting the opinions and perspectives on it from users and provider healthcare professionals, in terms of perceived barriers/facilitators, expectations and needs towards the service.
16 months from the service implementation

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
7 - issues CEC Survey
Time Frame: 16 months from service implementation

It is a closed-ended survey aiming to collect information on the level of knowledge, use, and dissemination of the CEC among all the HPs employed at the Local Health Authority of Reggio Emilia.

It is composed by 3 sections: section A asking participant's general information; section B asking participant's previous experience in ethical complex situation; section C asking patient's evaluation of the service in terms of: diffusion, knowledge, access, personal attitude, further suggestions.

Answer are organized into Yes/No or free space.

16 months from service implementation
semi-structured one-to-one interview
Time Frame: 16 months from service implementation
semi-structured one-to-one interviews to explore the opinions and perspectives on the CEC, in terms of barriers/facilitators, expectations and needs, from the perspectives of Local Health Authority's Managers/Wards Heads who have been involved in the design and delivery of the service.
16 months from service implementation
semi-structured one-to-one interview
Time Frame: 16 months from service implementation
semi-structured one-to-one interviews with CEC's members' concerns their motivations and expectations to be a member of the CEC, personal attitude toward the service, experience with CEC in terms of facilitators, problems, and critical evaluation of the service delivered.
16 months from service implementation
semi-structured interview with HPs who required ethics consultation
Time Frame: 16 months from service implementation
semi-structured interview concerns participants' experiences with the ethics consultation service provide by the Clinical Ethics Committee
16 months from service implementation
Normalisation MeAsure Development questionnaire (NoMAD)
Time Frame: 16 months from service implementation
The NoMAD survey is a set of 20 survey items for assessing implementation processes from the perspective of professionals directly involved in the work of implementing complex interventions in healthcare. This version comprises 20 multiple-choice questions, supplemented by 4 open questions. Answers are organized into a range of 5 options : 1. I do not agree, 2. I partially not agree, 3. I do not agree or disagree, 4. I partially agree, 5. I totally agree. Higher scores mean better outcomes.
16 months from service implementation

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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)

June 16, 2022

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

April 30, 2023

Study Completion (Anticipated)

May 30, 2023

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 14, 2022

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

July 18, 2022

First Posted (Actual)

July 20, 2022

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

March 6, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 3, 2023

Last Verified

March 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 1085/2021/OSS/IRCCSRE

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

All the IPD will be anonimyzed. PErsonal data will be collected in an aggregate way to be shared within research publications.

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 Service Evaluation

Clinical Trials on Survey1

3
Subscribe