School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Implement Sci. 2012 Nov 24;7:115. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-115.
Optimizing pain care requires ready access and use of best evidence within and across different disciplines and settings. The purpose of this randomized trial is to determine whether a technology-based "push" of new, high-quality pain research to physicians, nurses, and rehabilitation and psychology professionals results in better knowledge and clinical decision making around pain, when offered in addition to traditional "pull" evidence technology. A secondary objective is to identify disciplinary variations in response to evidence and differences in the patterns of accessing research evidence.
Physicians, nurses, occupational/physical therapists, and psychologists (n = 670) will be randomly allocated in a crossover design to receive a pain evidence resource in one of two different ways. Evidence is extracted from medical, nursing, psychology, and rehabilitation journals; appraised for quality/relevance; and sent out (PUSHed) to clinicians by email alerts or available for searches of the accumulated database (PULL). Participants are allocated to either PULL or PUSH + PULL in a randomized crossover design. The PULL intervention has a similar interface but does not send alerts; clinicians can only go to the site and enter search terms to retrieve evidence from the cumulative and continuously updated online database. Upon entry to the trial, there is three months of access to PULL, then random allocation. After six months, crossover takes place. The study ends with a final three months of access to PUSH + PULL. The primary outcomes are uptake and application of evidence. Uptake will be determined by embedded tracking of what research is accessed during use of the intervention. A random subset of 30 participants/ discipline will undergo chart-stimulated recall to assess the nature and depth of evidence utilization in actual case management at baseline and 9 months. A different random subset of 30 participants/ discipline will be tested for their skills in accessing evidence using a standardized simulation test (final 3 months). Secondary outcomes include usage and self-reported evidence-based practice attitudes and behaviors measured at baseline, 3, 9, 15 and 18 months.
The trial will inform our understanding of information preferences and behaviors across disciplines/practice settings. If this intervention is effective, sustained support will be sought from professional/health system initiatives with an interest in optimizing pain management.
Registered as NCT01348802 on clinicaltrials.gov.
优化疼痛护理需要在不同学科和环境中随时获取和使用最佳证据。本随机试验的目的是确定是否通过基于技术的方式“推送”新的高质量疼痛研究成果给医生、护士以及康复和心理专业人员,与传统的“拉取”证据技术相结合,可以改善他们对疼痛的知识和临床决策。次要目标是确定对证据的学科差异以及对研究证据的获取模式的差异。
将 670 名医生、护士、作业/物理治疗师和心理学家随机分配到交叉设计中,以两种不同方式之一接收疼痛证据资源。从医学、护理、心理学和康复期刊中提取证据;评估质量/相关性;并通过电子邮件提醒向临床医生“推送”(PUSH)或提供累积数据库的搜索(PULL)。参与者以随机交叉设计被分配到 PULL 或 PUSH+PULL。PULL 干预具有类似的界面,但不会发送提醒;临床医生只能访问该网站并输入搜索词,从累积的、持续更新的在线数据库中检索证据。进入试验后,他们有三个月的 PULL 访问权限,然后进行随机分配。六个月后,进行交叉。研究结束时,参与者再进行三个月的 PUSH+PULL 访问。主要结果是证据的获取和应用。通过嵌入的跟踪,可以确定在使用干预措施时,研究的实际获取情况,从而确定获取量。每个学科随机选择 30 名参与者进行图表刺激回忆,以评估基线和 9 个月时实际病例管理中证据利用的性质和深度。每个学科随机选择 30 名不同的参与者进行标准化模拟测试,以评估他们获取证据的技能(最后三个月)。次要结果包括基线、3、9、15 和 18 个月时使用情况和自我报告的基于证据的实践态度和行为。
该试验将为我们了解不同学科/实践环境下的信息偏好和行为提供信息。如果这种干预措施有效,将寻求专业/卫生系统倡议的持续支持,以优化疼痛管理。
在 clinicaltrials.gov 上注册为 NCT01348802。