Effectiveness of reminders to sustain practice change among direct care providers in residential care facilities: a cluster randomized controlled trial.
Cluster randomized controlled trial
Reminders
Sit-to-stand activity
Sustainability
Journal
Implementation science : IS
ISSN: 1748-5908
Titre abrégé: Implement Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101258411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2020
01 07 2020
Historique:
received:
16
03
2020
accepted:
16
06
2020
entrez:
3
7
2020
pubmed:
3
7
2020
medline:
25
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The study purpose was to compare the effectiveness of monthly or quarterly peer reminder knowledge translation interventions, with monthly or quarterly paper-based reminders, to sustain a mobility innovation, the sit-to-stand activity. A cluster RCT using a stratified 2 × 2 factorial design was conducted in 24 Canadian residential care facilities with 416 residents and 54 peer reminder care aides. The 1-year intervention included two intensities of reminders (high: socially based peer reminders delivered by volunteer care aides to other care aides; low: paper-based reminders posted in residents' rooms), at two frequencies (monthly; every 3 months). Intervention fidelity was assessed using questionnaires and observations. Monthly sustainability rate of the sit-to-stand activity was calculated as the percentage of opportunities that residents successfully completed the activity in 30 days. Residents' sustainability rates were analyzed using a linear mixed model that mirrored the clustered repeated-measures factorial trial design. The model included a random intercept to account for clustering within sites. An unstructured covariance structure characterized the interdependence of repeated measures over time. Twenty-four sites were randomized. One site was excluded because of falsifying data, leaving 23 sites and 349 residents for intention-to-treat analysis. Paper reminders were implemented with high fidelity across all arms (91.5% per protocol), while the peer reminders were implemented with moderate fidelity in the monthly group (81.0% per protocol) and poor fidelity in the quarterly group (51.7% per protocol). At month 1, mean sustainability ranged from 40.7 to 47.2 per 100 opportunities, across the four intervention arms (p = 0.43). Mean rate of sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group diverged after randomization, yielding statistically significant differences among the groups at 4 months which persisted for the remainder of the trial. After 12 months, the mean sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group was approximately twice that of the other three groups combined (64.1 versus 37.8 per 100 opportunities, p < 0.001). A monthly peer reminder intervention was more effective than a quarterly peer reminder intervention, a monthly paper-based reminder intervention, and a quarterly paper-based reminder intervention, in supporting care aides to sustain a mobility innovation in residential care facilities over 1 year. ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01746459. Registered 11 December 2012: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01746459 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The study purpose was to compare the effectiveness of monthly or quarterly peer reminder knowledge translation interventions, with monthly or quarterly paper-based reminders, to sustain a mobility innovation, the sit-to-stand activity.
METHOD
A cluster RCT using a stratified 2 × 2 factorial design was conducted in 24 Canadian residential care facilities with 416 residents and 54 peer reminder care aides. The 1-year intervention included two intensities of reminders (high: socially based peer reminders delivered by volunteer care aides to other care aides; low: paper-based reminders posted in residents' rooms), at two frequencies (monthly; every 3 months). Intervention fidelity was assessed using questionnaires and observations. Monthly sustainability rate of the sit-to-stand activity was calculated as the percentage of opportunities that residents successfully completed the activity in 30 days. Residents' sustainability rates were analyzed using a linear mixed model that mirrored the clustered repeated-measures factorial trial design. The model included a random intercept to account for clustering within sites. An unstructured covariance structure characterized the interdependence of repeated measures over time.
RESULTS
Twenty-four sites were randomized. One site was excluded because of falsifying data, leaving 23 sites and 349 residents for intention-to-treat analysis. Paper reminders were implemented with high fidelity across all arms (91.5% per protocol), while the peer reminders were implemented with moderate fidelity in the monthly group (81.0% per protocol) and poor fidelity in the quarterly group (51.7% per protocol). At month 1, mean sustainability ranged from 40.7 to 47.2 per 100 opportunities, across the four intervention arms (p = 0.43). Mean rate of sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group diverged after randomization, yielding statistically significant differences among the groups at 4 months which persisted for the remainder of the trial. After 12 months, the mean sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group was approximately twice that of the other three groups combined (64.1 versus 37.8 per 100 opportunities, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
A monthly peer reminder intervention was more effective than a quarterly peer reminder intervention, a monthly paper-based reminder intervention, and a quarterly paper-based reminder intervention, in supporting care aides to sustain a mobility innovation in residential care facilities over 1 year.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01746459. Registered 11 December 2012: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01746459 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 32611451
doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01012-z
pii: 10.1186/s13012-020-01012-z
pmc: PMC7329498
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01746459']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
51Références
Gerontol Geriatr Educ. 2007;28(2):77-90
pubmed: 18032192
Int J Older People Nurs. 2018 Mar;13(1):
pubmed: 28971588
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012 Mar;13(3):210-9
pubmed: 21450230
Implement Sci. 2012 May 31;7:50
pubmed: 22651257
Health Technol Assess. 2004 Feb;8(6):iii-iv, 1-72
pubmed: 14960256
Implement Sci. 2015 Sep 07;10:129
pubmed: 26345357
Trials. 2013 Oct 26;14:355
pubmed: 24160483
Can J Aging. 2016 Sep;35(3):372-84
pubmed: 27452374
Implement Sci. 2014 Oct 06;9:152
pubmed: 25287951
Implement Sci. 2008 Jan 07;3:1
pubmed: 18179688
Age Ageing. 2007 Sep;36(5):555-62
pubmed: 17646216
Can J Aging. 2015 Mar;34(1):47-59
pubmed: 25525838
BMJ Open. 2017 May 17;7(5):e015521
pubmed: 28515199
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2019 Feb;16(1):21-28
pubmed: 30701658
Hum Resour Health. 2013 Jun 14;11:25
pubmed: 23768158
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011 Mar;38(2):65-76
pubmed: 20957426
J Ren Nutr. 2015 Jan;25(1):17-24
pubmed: 25194621
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2015 Feb;16(2):138-43
pubmed: 25271194
J Adv Nurs. 2006 Mar;53(6):691-701
pubmed: 16553677
Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2017 Jun;14(3):237-245
pubmed: 28449400