Trial reportImplementation science : IS2015
A cluster randomized trial of a multifaceted quality improvement intervention in Brazilian intensive care units: study protocol.
Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT01785966 (Checklist During Multidisciplinary Daily Visits and Clinician Prompting for Reduction of Mortality in Intensive Care Units), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Checklist During Multidisciplinary Daily Visits and Clinician Prompting for Reduction of Mortality in Intensive Care Units: A Cluster Randomized Trial
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What validated instruments, that measure implementation outcomes, are suitable for use in the Paediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) setting? A systematic review of systematic reviews.Implementation science : IS · 2024Pooled it
- Instruments for Patient Safety Assessment: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Measuring Performance on the ABCDEF Bundle During Interprofessional Rounds via a Nurse-Based Assessment Tool.American journal of critical care : an official publication, American Association of Critical-Care Nurses · 2023Article
- Implementation of clinical practice changes in the PICU: a qualitative study using and refining the iPARIHS framework.Implementation science : IS · 2021Article
- Organizational factors associated with adherence to low tidal volume ventilation: a secondary analysis of the CHECKLIST-ICU database.Annals of intensive care · 2020Article
- Organizational factors associated with target sedation on the first 48 h of mechanical ventilation: an analysis of checklist-ICU database.Critical care (London, England) · 2019Article
- Critical Care Organizations: Building and Integrating Academic Programs.Critical care medicine · 2018Article
- Erratum to: A cluster randomized trial of a multifaceted quality improvement intervention in Brazilian intensive care units: study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum to: A cluster randomized trial of a multifaceted quality improvement intervention in Brazilian intensive care units: study protocol.2015 · Cavalcanti, Alexandre [removed]
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe uptake of evidence-based therapies in the intensive care environment is suboptimal, particularly in limited-resource countries. Checklists, daily goal assessments, and clinician prompts may improve compliance with best practice processes of care and, in turn, improve clinical outcomes. However, the available evidence on the effectiveness of checklists is unreliable and inconclusive, and the mechanisms are poorly understood. We aim to evaluate whether the use of a multifaceted quality improvement intervention, including the use of a checklist and the definition of daily care goals during multidisciplinary daily rounds and clinician prompts, can improve the in-hospital mortality of patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Our secondary objectives are to assess the effects of the study intervention on specific processes of care, clinical outcomes, and the safety culture and to determine which factors (the processes of care and/or safety culture) mediate the effect of the study intervention on mortality. METHODS/
designThis is a cluster randomized trial involving 118 ICUs in Brazil conducted in two phases. In the observational preparatory phase, we collect baseline data on processes of care and clinical outcomes from 60 consecutive patients with lengths of ICU stay longer than 48 h and apply the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire (SAQ) to 75% or more of the health care staff in each ICU. In the randomized phase, we assign ICUs to the experimental or control arm and repeat data collection. Experimental arm ICUs receive the multifaceted quality improvement intervention, including a checklist and definition of daily care goals during daily multidisciplinary rounds, clinician prompting, and feedback on rates of adherence to selected care processes. Control arm ICUs maintain usual care. The primary outcome is in-hospital mortality, truncated at 60 days. Secondary outcomes include the rates of adherence to appropriate care processes, rates of other clinical outcomes, and scores on the SAQ domains. Analysis follows the intention-to-treat principle, and the primary outcome is analyzed using mixed effects logistic regression. DISCUSSION: This is a large scale, pragmatic cluster-randomized trial evaluating whether a multifaceted quality improvement intervention, including checklists applied during the multidisciplinary daily rounds and clinician prompting, can improve the adoption of proven therapies and decrease the mortality of critically ill patients. If this study finds that the intervention reduces mortality, it may be widely adopted in intensive care units, even those in limited-resource settings.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01785966.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.