Faculty of Nursing, Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, University of Alberta, 11405 87 Avenue, Edmonton, T6G 1C9, Canada.
Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University, Boston, USA.
Implement Sci. 2020 Jul 1;15(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-01012-z.
The study purpose was to compare the effectiveness of monthly or quarterly peer reminder knowledge translation interventions, with monthly or quarterly paper-based reminders, to sustain a mobility innovation, the sit-to-stand activity.
A cluster RCT using a stratified 2 × 2 factorial design was conducted in 24 Canadian residential care facilities with 416 residents and 54 peer reminder care aides. The 1-year intervention included two intensities of reminders (high: socially based peer reminders delivered by volunteer care aides to other care aides; low: paper-based reminders posted in residents' rooms), at two frequencies (monthly; every 3 months). Intervention fidelity was assessed using questionnaires and observations. Monthly sustainability rate of the sit-to-stand activity was calculated as the percentage of opportunities that residents successfully completed the activity in 30 days. Residents' sustainability rates were analyzed using a linear mixed model that mirrored the clustered repeated-measures factorial trial design. The model included a random intercept to account for clustering within sites. An unstructured covariance structure characterized the interdependence of repeated measures over time.
Twenty-four sites were randomized. One site was excluded because of falsifying data, leaving 23 sites and 349 residents for intention-to-treat analysis. Paper reminders were implemented with high fidelity across all arms (91.5% per protocol), while the peer reminders were implemented with moderate fidelity in the monthly group (81.0% per protocol) and poor fidelity in the quarterly group (51.7% per protocol). At month 1, mean sustainability ranged from 40.7 to 47.2 per 100 opportunities, across the four intervention arms (p = 0.43). Mean rate of sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group diverged after randomization, yielding statistically significant differences among the groups at 4 months which persisted for the remainder of the trial. After 12 months, the mean sustainability in the high intensity, high frequency group was approximately twice that of the other three groups combined (64.1 versus 37.8 per 100 opportunities, p < 0.001).
A monthly peer reminder intervention was more effective than a quarterly peer reminder intervention, a monthly paper-based reminder intervention, and a quarterly paper-based reminder intervention, in supporting care aides to sustain a mobility innovation in residential care facilities over 1 year.
ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT01746459. Registered 11 December 2012: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01746459 .
本研究旨在比较每月或每季度同伴提醒知识转化干预与每月或每季度纸质提醒对维持一项移动性创新(坐站活动)的效果。
这是一项在 24 家加拿大养老院进行的集群 RCT,共纳入 416 名居民和 54 名同伴提醒护理助手。为期 1 年的干预措施包括两种提醒强度(高:由志愿者护理助手提供的基于社交的同伴提醒,传递给其他护理助手;低:张贴在居民房间内的纸质提醒)和两种频率(每月;每 3 个月)。通过问卷和观察评估干预的保真度。坐站活动的每月可持续性率计算为居民在 30 天内成功完成活动的机会百分比。采用线性混合模型分析居民的可持续性率,该模型模拟了聚类重复测量因子试验设计。该模型包括一个随机截距,以解释站点内的聚类。非结构化协方差结构描述了随时间重复测量的相关性。
24 个站点被随机分配。由于数据伪造,有 1 个站点被排除,留下 23 个站点和 349 名居民进行意向治疗分析。所有组的纸质提醒都得到了高度保真(按方案 91.5%),而每月组的同伴提醒得到了中等保真(按方案 81.0%),而季度组的同伴提醒则得到了较差的保真(按方案 51.7%)。在第 1 个月,四个干预组的可持续性均值范围为每 100 次机会 40.7 至 47.2 次(p = 0.43)。高强度、高频率组在随机分组后可持续性均值出现差异,在 4 个月时组间出现统计学差异,并持续到试验的其余时间。12 个月后,高强度、高频率组的可持续性均值约为其他三组的两倍(每 100 次机会 64.1 次与 37.8 次,p < 0.001)。
与每月纸质提醒干预、每季度纸质提醒干预和每季度同伴提醒干预相比,每月同伴提醒干预在支持护理助手在 1 年内维持住宅护理设施的移动性创新方面更有效。
ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT01746459。于 2012 年 12 月 11 日注册:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01746459。