Title |
The evaluation of a tailored intervention to improve the management of suspected viral encephalitis: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial
|
---|---|
Published in |
Implementation Science, January 2015
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13012-014-0201-1 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Ruth Backman, Robbie Foy, Peter J Diggle, Rachel Kneen, Sylviane Defres, Benedict Daniel Michael, Antonieta Medina-Lara, Tom Solomon |
Abstract |
BackgroundViral encephalitis is a devastating condition for which delayed treatment is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Clinical audits indicate substantial scope for improved detection and treatment. Improvement strategies should ideally be tailored according to identified needs and barriers to change. The aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tailored intervention to improve the secondary care management of suspected encephalitis.Methods/designThe study is a two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial with allocation by postgraduate deanery. Participants were identified from 24 hospitals nested within 12 postgraduate deaneries in the United Kingdom (UK). We developed a multifaceted intervention package including core and flexible components with embedded behaviour change techniques selected on the basis of identified needs and barriers to change. The primary outcome will be a composite of the proportion of patients with suspected encephalitis receiving timely and appropriate diagnostic lumbar puncture within 12 h of hospital admission and aciclovir treatment within 6 h. We will gather outcome data pre-intervention and up to 12 months post-intervention from patient records. Statistical analysis at the cluster level will be blind to allocation. An economic evaluation will estimate intervention cost-effectiveness from the health service perspective.Trial registrationControlled Trials: ISRCTN06886935. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 60% |
Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 39 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 8 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 15% |
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 5% |
Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
Other | 7 | 18% |
Unknown | 13 | 33% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 33% |
Psychology | 6 | 15% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 5% |
Social Sciences | 2 | 5% |
Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
Other | 2 | 5% |
Unknown | 14 | 35% |