Trial reportBMJ quality & safety2019
Impact of audit and feedback with action implementation toolbox on improving ICU pain management: cluster-randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ quality & safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02922101 (Increasing the Effectiveness and Understanding of Audit and Feedback Interventions in Intensive Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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.
Increasing the Effectiveness and Understanding of Audit and Feedback Interventions in Intensive Care: Protocol for a Mixed-methods Study
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Tailored interventions to address determinants of practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Methods used to design audit and feedback interventions to change clinical practice: a scoping review.Frontiers in health services · 2026Pooled it
- Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Identifying behaviour change techniques in 287 randomized controlled trials of audit and feedback interventions targeting practice change among healthcare professionals.Implementation science : IS · 2023Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Record Driven Quality Measurement and Feedback Systems.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Evaluating a Physician Audit and Feedback Intervention to Increase Clinical Trial Enrollment in Radiation Oncology in a Multisite Tertiary Cancer Center: A Randomized Study.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2024Trial
- Comparing effects of two higher intensity feedback interventions with simple feedback on improving staff communication in nursing homes-the INFORM cluster-randomized controlled trial.Implementation science : IS · 2020Trial
- Co-design and evaluation of a regional and rural translation bronchiolitis platform: study protocol.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- Data Resource Profile Update: The Dutch National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE) registry.International journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Practical guide for determining whether healthcare providers are research participants in cluster randomised trials.BMJ open · 2026Review
- Impact of provider feedback on quality improvement in rehabilitation services: an interrupted time series analysis.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- A realist synthesis of multicentre comparative audit implementation: exploring what works and in which healthcare contexts.BMJ open quality · 2024Review
- Article
- A scoping review of local quality improvement using data from UK perioperative National Clinical Audits.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2022Article
- International comparison of variation in performance between hospitals for THA and TKA: Is it even possible? A systematic review including 33 studies and 8 arthroplasty register reports.EFORT open reviews · 2022Review
- Process evaluations undertaken alongside randomised controlled trials in the hospital setting: A scoping review.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2022Article
- What intensive care registries can teach us about outcomes.Current opinion in critical care · 2021Review
- Awareness of performance on outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty among Dutch orthopedic surgeons: how to improve feedback from arthroplasty registries.Acta orthopaedica · 2021Article
- Requirements for a Dashboard to Support Quality Improvement Teams in Pain Management.Frontiers in big data · 2021Article
- Towards Better Perioperative Pain Management in Mexico: A Study in a Network of Hospitals Using Quality Improvement Methods from PAIN OUT.Journal of pain research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAudit and feedback (A&F) enjoys widespread use, but often achieves only marginal improvements in care. Providing recipients of A&F with suggested actions to overcome barriers (action implementation toolbox) may increase effectiveness.
objectiveTo assess the impact of adding an action implementation toolbox to an electronic A&F intervention targeting quality of pain management in intensive care units (ICUs). TRIAL
designTwo-armed cluster-randomised controlled trial. Randomisation was computer generated, with allocation concealment by a researcher, unaffiliated with the study. Investigators were not blinded to the group assignment of an ICU.
participantsTwenty-one Dutch ICUs and patients eligible for pain measurement.
interventionsFeedback-only versus feedback with action implementation toolbox. OUTCOME: Proportion of patient-shift observations where pain management was adequate; composed by two process (measuring pain at least once per patient in each shift; re-measuring unacceptable pain scores within 1 hour) and two outcome indicators (acceptable pain scores; unacceptable pain scores normalised within 1 hour).
results21 ICUs (
conclusionFeedback with toolbox improved the number of shifts where patients received adequate pain management compared with feedback alone, but only in process and not outcome indicators. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02922101.
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.