NDLI: Process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial to improve bronchiolitis management

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Haskell, Libby Tavender, Emma J. O’Brien, Sharon Wilson, Catherine L. Babl, Franz E. Borland, Meredith L. Schembri, Rachel Orsini, Francesca Cotterell, Elizabeth Sheridan, Nicolette Oakley, Ed Dalziel, Stuart R.
Abstract	Background Bronchiolitis is the most common reason for hospitalisation in infants. All international bronchiolitis guidelines recommend supportive care, yet considerable variation in practice continues with infants receiving non-evidence based therapies. We developed six targeted, theory-informed interventions; clinical leads, stakeholder meeting, train-the-trainer, education delivery, other educational materials, and audit and feedback. A cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) found the interventions to be effective in reducing use of five non-evidence based therapies in infants with bronchiolitis. This process evaluation paper aims to determine whether the interventions were implemented as planned (fidelity), explore end-users’ perceptions of the interventions and evaluate cRCT outcome data with intervention fidelity data. Methods A pre-specified mixed-methods process evaluation was conducted alongside the cRCT, guided by frameworks for process evaluation of cRCTs and complex interventions. Quantitative data on the fidelity, dose and reach of interventions were collected from the 13 intervention hospitals during the study and analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data identifying perception and acceptability of interventions were collected from 42 intervention hospital clinical leads on study completion and analysed using thematic analysis. Results The cRCT found targeted, theory-informed interventions improved bronchiolitis management by 14.1%. The process evaluation data found variability in how the intervention was delivered at the cluster and individual level. Total fidelity scores ranged from 55 to 98% across intervention hospitals (mean = 78%; SD = 13%). Fidelity scores were highest for use of clinical leads (mean = 98%; SD = 7%), and lowest for use of other educational materials (mean = 65%; SD = 19%) and audit and feedback (mean = 65%; SD = 20%). Clinical leads reflected positively about the interventions, with time constraints being the greatest barrier to their use. Conclusion Our targeted, theory-informed interventions were delivered with moderate fidelity, and were well received by clinical leads. Despite clinical leads experiencing challenges of time constraints, the level of fidelity had a positive effect on successfully de-implementing non-evidence-based care in infants with bronchiolitis. These findings will inform widespread rollout of our bronchiolitis interventions, and guide future practice change in acute care settings. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12616001567415 .
Related Links	https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12913-021-07279-2.pdf
Ending Page	13
Page Count	13
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	14726963
DOI	10.1186/s12913-021-07279-2
Journal	BMC Health Services Research
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	21
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2021-11-29
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Public Health Health Administration Health Informatics Nursing Research
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Health Policy

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

The evaluation of a tailored intervention to improve the management of suspected viral encephalitis: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Process evaluation of a cluster-randomised trial testing a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle: a mixed-methods study

Screening and care for emotional and cognitive problems after stroke: a prospective mixed-methods process evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Implementing a ward-based programme to improve care for older inpatients: process evaluation of the cluster randomised CHERISH trial

A cluster randomised controlled trial, process and economic evaluation of quality improvement collaboratives aligned to a national audit to improve the care for people with diabetes (EQUIPD): study protocol

Process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial intervention designed to improve rehabilitation services for Aboriginal Australians after brain injury: the Healing Right Way Trial

Cost-effectiveness of a nurse-based intervention (AIMS) to improve adherence among HIV-infected patients: design of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

Reducing unnecessary hospital days to improve quality of care through physician accountability: a cluster randomised trial

Views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to a psychosocial randomised controlled trial: a qualitative study

Process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial to improve bronchiolitis management – a PREDICT mixed-methods study

Similar Documents

The evaluation of a tailored intervention to improve the management of suspected viral encephalitis: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Process evaluation of a cluster-randomised trial testing a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle: a mixed-methods study

Screening and care for emotional and cognitive problems after stroke: a prospective mixed-methods process evaluation of a cluster-randomized controlled trial

Implementing a ward-based programme to improve care for older inpatients: process evaluation of the cluster randomised CHERISH trial

A cluster randomised controlled trial, process and economic evaluation of quality improvement collaboratives aligned to a national audit to improve the care for people with diabetes (EQUIPD): study protocol

Process evaluation of a randomised controlled trial intervention designed to improve rehabilitation services for Aboriginal Australians after brain injury: the Healing Right Way Trial

Cost-effectiveness of a nurse-based intervention (AIMS) to improve adherence among HIV-infected patients: design of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

Reducing unnecessary hospital days to improve quality of care through physician accountability: a cluster randomised trial

Views of healthcare professionals on recruiting to a psychosocial randomised controlled trial: a qualitative study

Process evaluation of a cluster randomised controlled trial to improve bronchiolitis management – a PREDICT mixed-methods study