COVID-19 randomised trial protocols : Rapid publication without barriers

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Knowledge Translation Consensus Conference: Research Methods

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/72708/1/j.1553-2712.2007.tb02378.x.pd

Performance feedback: An exploratory study to examine the acceptability and impact for interdisciplinary primary care teams

Background - This mixed methods study was designed to explore the acceptability and impact of feedback of team performance data to primary care interdisciplinary teams. // Methods - Seven interdisciplinary teams were offered a one-hour, facilitated performance feedback session presenting data from a comprehensive, previously-conducted evaluation, selecting highlights such as performance on chronic disease management, access, patient satisfaction and team function. // Results - Several recurrent themes emerged from participants' surveys and two rounds of interviews within three months of the feedback session. Team performance measurement and feedback was welcomed across teams and disciplines. This feedback could build the team, the culture, and the capacity for quality improvement. However, existing performance indicators do not equally reflect the role of different disciplines within an interdisciplinary team. Finally, the effect of team performance feedback on intentions to improve performance was hindered by a poor understanding of how the team could use the data. // Conclusions - The findings further our understanding of how performance feedback may engage interdisciplinary team members in improving the quality of primary care and the unique challenges specific to these settings. There is a need to develop a shared sense of responsibility and agenda for quality improvement. Therefore, more efforts to develop flexible and interactive performance-reporting structures (that better reflect contributions from all team members) in which teams could specify the information and audience may assist in promoting quality improvement

A randomized trial to assess the impact of opinion leader endorsed evidence summaries on the use of secondary prevention strategies in patients with coronary artery disease: the ESP-CAD trial protocol [NCT00175240]

BACKGROUND: Although numerous therapies have been shown to be beneficial in the prevention of myocardial infarction and/or death in patients with coronary disease, these therapies are under-used and this gap contributes to sub-optimal patient outcomes. To increase the uptake of proven efficacious therapies in patients with coronary disease, we designed a multifaceted quality improvement intervention employing patient-specific reminders delivered at the point-of-care, with one-page treatment guidelines endorsed by local opinion leaders ("Local Opinion Leader Statement"). This trial is designed to evaluate the impact of these Local Opinion Leader Statements on the practices of primary care physicians caring for patients with coronary disease. In order to isolate the effects of the messenger (the local opinion leader) from the message, we will also test an identical quality improvement intervention that is not signed by a local opinion leader ("Unsigned Evidence Statement") in this trial. METHODS: Randomized trial testing three different interventions in patients with coronary disease: (1) usual care versus (2) Local Opinion Leader Statement versus (3) Unsigned Evidence Statement. Patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease after cardiac catheterization (but without acute coronary syndromes) will be randomly allocated to one of the three interventions by cluster randomization (at the level of their primary care physician), if they are not on optimal statin therapy at baseline. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients demonstrating improvement in their statin management in the first six months post-catheterization. Secondary outcomes include examinations of the use of ACE inhibitors, anti-platelet agents, beta-blockers, non-statin lipid lowering drugs, and provision of smoking cessation advice in the first six months post-catheterization in the three treatment arms. Although randomization will be clustered at the level of the primary care physician, the design effect is anticipated to be negligible and the unit of analysis will be the patient. DISCUSSION: If either the Local Opinion Leader Statement or the Unsigned Evidence Statement improves secondary prevention in patients with coronary disease, they can be easily modified and applied in other communities and for other target conditions

Pediatricians’ assessments of caries risk and need for a dental evaluation in preschool aged children

Abstract Background Risk-based prioritization of dental referrals during well-child visits might improve dental access for infants and toddlers. This study identifies pediatrician-assessed risk factors for early childhood caries (ECC) and their association with the need for a dentist’s evaluation. Methods A priority oral health risk assessment and referral tool (PORRT) for children < 36 months was developed collaboratively by physicians and dentists and used by 10 pediatricians during well-child visits. PORRT documented behavioral, clinical, and child health risks for ECC. Pediatricians also assessed overall ECC risk on an 11-point scale and determined the need for a dental evaluation. Logistic regression models calculated the odds for evaluation need for each risk factor and according to a 3-level risk classification. Results In total 1,288 PORRT forms were completed; 6.8% of children were identified as needing a dentist evaluation. Behavioral risk factors were prevalent but not strong predictors of the need for an evaluation. The child’s overall caries risk was the strongest predictor of the need for an evaluation. Cavitated (OR = 17.5; 95% CI = 8.08, 37.97) and non-cavitated (OR = 6.9; 95% CI = 4.47, 10.82) lesions were the strongest predictors when the caries risk scale was excluded from the analysis. Few patients (6.3%) were classified as high risk, but their probability of needing an evaluation was only 0.36. Conclusions Low referral rates for children with disease and prior to disease onset but at elevated risk, indicate interventions are needed to help improve the dental referral rates of physicians

A New Model of Security for Metasystems

With the rapid growth of high-speed networking and microprocessing power, metasystems have become increasingly popular. The need for protection and security in such environments has never been greater. However, the conventional approach to security, that of enforcing a single system-wide policy, will not work for the large-scale distributed systems we envision. Our new model shifts the emphasis from &quot;system as enforcer&quot; to user-definable policies, making users responsible for the security of their objects. This security model has been implemented as part of the Legion project. Legion is an object-oriented metacomputing system, with strong support for autonomy. This includes support for per-object, user-defined policies in many areas, including resource management and security. This paper briefly describes the Legion system, presents our security model, and discusses the realization of that model in Legion