Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28514964›Full record

Trial reportTrials2017

HELP! Problems in executing a pragmatic, randomized, stepped wedge trial on the Hospital Elder Life Program to prevent delirium in older patients.

Noor Heim, Henk F van Stel, Roelof G Ettema, Roos C van der Mast, Sharon K Inouye, Marieke J Schuurmans

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Exercise for acutely hospitalised older medical patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Hospital Elder Life Program: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Effectiveness.The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry · 2018
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Noor HeimJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. NHeim@zinl.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-7644-9723
Henk F van StelJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Roelof G EttemaJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Roos C van der MastDepartment of Psychiatry, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Sharon K InouyeDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Marieke J SchuurmansJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
University Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Applied Sciences Utrecht · NLBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USUniversity of Antwerp · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA pragmatic, stepped wedge trial design can be an appealing design to evaluate complex interventions in real-life settings. However, there are certain pitfalls that need to be considered. This paper reports on the experiences and lessons learned from the conduct of a cluster randomized, stepped wedge trial evaluating the effect of the Hospital Elder Life Program (HELP) in a Dutch hospital setting to prevent older patients from developing delirium.

methodsWe evaluated our trial which was conducted in eight departments in two hospitals in hospitalized patients aged 70 years or older who were at risk for delirium by reflecting on the assumptions that we had and on what we intended to accomplish when we started, as compared to what we actually realized in the different phases of our study. Lessons learned on the design, the timeline, the enrollment of eligible patients and the use of routinely collected data are provided accompanied by recommendations to address challenges.

resultsThe start of the trial was delayed which caused subsequent time schedule problems. The requirement for individual informed consent for a quality improvement project made the inclusion more prone to selection bias. Most units experienced major difficulties in including patients, leading to excluding two of the eight units from participation. This resulted in failing to include a similar number of patients in the control condition versus the intervention condition. Data on outcomes routinely collected in the electronic patient records were not accessible during the study, and appeared to be often missing during analyses.

conclusionsThe stepped wedge, cluster randomized trial poses specific risks in the design and execution of research in real-life settings of which researchers should be aware to prevent negative consequences impacting the validity of their results. Valid conclusions on the effectiveness of the HELP in the Dutch hospital setting are hampered by the limited quantity and quality of routine clinical data in our pragmatic trial. Executing a stepped wedge design in a daily practice setting using routinely collected data requires specific attention to ethical review, flexibility, a spacious time schedule, the availability of substantial capacity in the research team and early checks on the data availability and quality.

trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register, identifier: NTR3842 . Registered on 24 January 2013.

Indexed as

Research DesignAgedAge FactorsClinical ProtocolsCognitive AgingCombined Modality TherapyDeliriumFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMaleNetherlandsPatient Care TeamPatient SelectionQuality of LifeRisk FactorsDeliriumPragmatic trialStepped wedge trial

Identifiers

PMID28514964
PMCPMC5436415
OpenAlexW2615418846

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.