108 research outputs found

    The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: The 'Hawthorne Effect' may be an important factor affecting the generalisability of clinical research to routine practice, but has been little studied. Hawthorne Effects have been reported in previous clinical trials in dementia but to our knowledge, no attempt has been made to quantify them. Our aim was to compare minimal follow- up to intensive follow-up in participants in a placebo controlled trial of Ginkgo biloba for treating mild-moderate dementia.Methods: Participants in a dementia trial were randomised to intensive follow- up (with comprehensive assessment visits at baseline and two, four and six months post randomisation) or minimal follow-up (with an abbreviated assessment at baseline and a full assessment at six months). Our primary outcomes were cognitive functioning (ADAS-Cog) and participant and carer-rated quality of life (QOL-AD).Results: We recruited 176 participants, mainly through general practices. The main analysis was based on Intention to treat (ITT), with available data. In the ANCOVA model with baseline score as a co- variate, follow-up group had a significant effect on outcome at six months on the ADAS-Cog score (n = 140; mean difference = -2.018; 95% Cl -3.914, -0.121; p = 0.037 favouring the intensive follow-up group), and on participant- rated quality of life score (n = 142; mean difference = -1.382; 95% Cl -2.642, -0.122; p = 0.032 favouring minimal follow-up group). There was no significant difference on carer quality of life.Conclusion: We found that more intensive follow-up of individuals in a placebo-controlled clinical trial of Ginkgo biloba for treating mild-moderate dementia resulted in a better outcome than minimal follow-up, as measured by their cognitive functioning

    Validation of the Work Observation Method By Activity Timing (WOMBAT) method of conducting time-motion observations in critical care settings: an observational study

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Electronic documentation handling may facilitate information flows in health care settings to support better coordination of care among Health Care Providers (HCPs), but evidence is limited. Methods that accurately depict changes to the workflows of HCPs are needed to assess whether the introduction of a Critical Care clinical Information System (CCIS) to two Intensive Care Units (ICUs) represents a positive step for patient care. To evaluate a previously described method of quantifying amounts of time spent and interruptions encountered by HCPs working in two ICUs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Observers used PDAs running the Work Observation Method By Activity Timing (WOMBAT) software to record the tasks performed by HCPs in advance of the introduction of a Critical Care clinical Information System (CCIS) to quantify amounts of time spent on tasks and interruptions encountered by HCPs in ICUs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We report the percentages of time spent on each task category, and the rates of interruptions observed for physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, and unit clerks. Compared with previously published data from Australian hospital wards, interdisciplinary information sharing and communication in ICUs explain higher proportions of time spent on professional communication and documentation by nurses and physicians, as well as more frequent interruptions which are often followed by professional communication tasks.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Critical care workloads include requirements for timely information sharing and communication and explain the differences we observed between the two datasets. The data presented here further validate the WOMBAT method, and support plans to compare workflows before and after the introduction of electronic documentation methods in ICUs.</p

    Can Simply Answering Research Questions Change Behaviour? Systematic Review and Meta Analyses of Brief Alcohol Intervention Trials

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Participant reports of their own behaviour are critical for the provision and evaluation of behavioural interventions. Recent developments in brief alcohol intervention trials provide an opportunity to evaluate longstanding concerns that answering questions on behaviour as part of research assessments may inadvertently influence it and produce bias. The study objective was to evaluate the size and nature of effects observed in randomized manipulations of the effects of answering questions on drinking behaviour in brief intervention trials. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Multiple methods were used to identify primary studies. Between-group differences in total weekly alcohol consumption, quantity per drinking day and AUDIT scores were evaluated in random effects meta-analyses. Ten trials were included in this review, of which two did not provide findings for quantitative study, in which three outcomes were evaluated. Between-group differences were of the magnitude of 13.7 (-0.17 to 27.6) grams of alcohol per week (approximately 1.5 U.K. units or 1 standard U.S. drink) and 1 point (0.1 to 1.9) in AUDIT score. There was no difference in quantity per drinking day. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Answering questions on drinking in brief intervention trials appears to alter subsequent self-reported behaviour. This potentially generates bias by exposing non-intervention control groups to an integral component of the intervention. The effects of brief alcohol interventions may thus have been consistently under-estimated. These findings are relevant to evaluations of any interventions to alter behaviours which involve participant self-report

    The time is now for action research

    No full text

    Managing the Altered Organization

    No full text

    Tied to the job: affective and relational components of nurse retention

    No full text
    Paper investigates whether affective and relational components of nurses' experience of work have a significant impact on their intentions to leave either the job or the nursing profession in models that control for other factors (sociodemographic, work conditions, perceptions of quality of care) that are known to affect career decisions. [Abridged Abstract
    corecore