Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28673310›Full record

ArticleImplementation science : IS2017

The evaluation of enhanced feedback interventions to reduce unnecessary blood transfusions (AFFINITIE): protocol for two linked cluster randomised factorial controlled trials.

Suzanne Hartley, Robbie Foy, Rebecca E A Walwyn, Robert Cicero, Amanda J Farrin, Jill J Francis, Fabiana Lorencatto, Natalie J Gould, John Grant-Casey, Jeremy M Grimshaw and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Implementation science : IS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Implementation of the Recommendations for RBC Transfusions for Critically Ill Children From the Pediatric Critical Care Transfusion and Anemia Expertise Initiative.Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies · 2018
    Article
  15. 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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Suzanne HartleyClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. s.hartley@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-2346-9461
Robbie FoyLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Rebecca E A WalwynClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Robert CiceroClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Amanda J FarrinClinical Trials Research Unit, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jill J FrancisCentre for Health Services Research, University of London, London, UK.
Fabiana LorencattoCentre for Health Services Research, University of London, London, UK.
Natalie J GouldCentre for Health Services Research, University of London, London, UK.
John Grant-CaseyNHS Blood & Transplant, Oxford, UK.
Jeremy M GrimshawClinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
Liz GlidewellLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Susan MichieCentre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, University College London, London, UK.
Stephen MorrisDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK.
Simon J StanworthTransfusion Medicine, NHS Blood and Transplant, Oxford, UK.
AFFINITIE programme
University of Leeds · GBUniversity of London · GBNHS Blood and Transplant · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBlood for transfusion is a frequently used clinical intervention, and is also a costly and limited resource with risks. Many transfusions are given to stable and non-bleeding patients despite no clear evidence of benefit from clinical studies. Audit and feedback (A&F) is widely used to improve the quality of healthcare, including appropriate use of blood. However, its effects are often inconsistent, indicating the need for coordinated research including more head-to-head trials comparing different ways of delivering feedback. A programmatic series of research projects, termed the 'Audit and Feedback INterventions to Increase evidence-based Transfusion practIcE' (AFFINITIE) programme, aims to test different ways of developing and delivering feedback within an existing national audit structure.

methodsThe evaluation will comprise two linked 2×2 factorial, cross-sectional cluster-randomised controlled trials. Each trial will estimate the effects of two feedback interventions, 'enhanced content' and 'enhanced follow-on support', designed in earlier stages of the AFFINITIE programme, compared to current practice. The interventions will be embedded within two rounds of the UK National Comparative Audit of Blood Transfusion (NCABT) focusing on patient blood management in surgery and use of blood transfusions in patients with haematological malignancies. The unit of randomisation will be National Health Service (NHS) trust or health board. Clusters providing care relevant to the audit topics will be randomised following each baseline audit (separately for each trial), with stratification for size (volume of blood transfusions) and region (Regional Transfusion Committee). The primary outcome for each topic will be the proportion of patients receiving a transfusion coded as unnecessary. For each audit topic a linked, mixed-method fidelity assessment and cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted in parallel to the trial. DISCUSSION: AFFINITIE involves a series of studies to explore how A&F may be refined to change practice including two cluster randomised trials linked to national audits of transfusion practice. The methodology represents a step-wise increment in study design to more fully evaluate the effects of two enhanced feedback interventions on patient- and trust-level clinical, cost, safety and process outcomes.

trial registrationhttp://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15490813.

Indexed as

Blood TransfusionFeedbackMedical AuditPractice Guidelines as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUnnecessary ProceduresCluster AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMedical OverusePractice Patterns, Physicians'United KingdomAuditBlood transfusionCluster randomisationImplementationRandomised controlled trialSplit-block design

Identifiers

PMID28673310
PMCPMC5496161
OpenAlexW2725501831

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.