Implementation of the Canadian syncope pathway: a pilot non-randomized stepped wedge trial.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2023-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1007/s43678-023-00570-7
Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy, Maria Keller, Phuong Anh Iris Nguyen, Preeti Gupta, Bahareh Ghaedi, George Z Q Cao, Warren J Cheung, Bikalpa Khatiwada, Marie-Joe Nemnom, Krishan Yadav, Debra Eagles, Jamie Brehaut, Wadea Tarhuni, Genevieve Rouleau, Laura Desveaux, Monica Taljaard
{"title":"Implementation of the Canadian syncope pathway: a pilot non-randomized stepped wedge trial.","authors":"Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy,&nbsp;Maria Keller,&nbsp;Phuong Anh Iris Nguyen,&nbsp;Preeti Gupta,&nbsp;Bahareh Ghaedi,&nbsp;George Z Q Cao,&nbsp;Warren J Cheung,&nbsp;Bikalpa Khatiwada,&nbsp;Marie-Joe Nemnom,&nbsp;Krishan Yadav,&nbsp;Debra Eagles,&nbsp;Jamie Brehaut,&nbsp;Wadea Tarhuni,&nbsp;Genevieve Rouleau,&nbsp;Laura Desveaux,&nbsp;Monica Taljaard","doi":"10.1007/s43678-023-00570-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We developed the Canadian Syncope Pathway (CSP) based on the Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) to aid emergency department (ED) syncope management. This pilot implementation study assessed patient inclusion, length of transition period, as well as process measures (engagement, reach, adoption, and fidelity) to prepare for multicenter implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A non-randomized stepped wedge trial at two hospitals was conducted over a 7-month period. After 2-3 months in the control condition, the hospitals crossed over in a stepwise fashion to the intervention condition. Study participants were ED and non-ED physicians, or their delegates, and patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with syncope. We aimed to analyze patient characteristics, ED management including disposition decision, and CSRS recommendations application for all eligible patients during the intervention period. Our targets were 95% inclusion rate, 70% adoption (proportion of physicians who applied the pathway), 60% reach (intervention applied to eligible patients) and 70% fidelity (appropriate recommendations application) for all eligible patients. Clinical Trials registration NCT04790058.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1002 eligible patients (mean age 56.6 years; 51.0% males) were included: 349 patients during the control and 653 patients during the intervention period. Physician engagement varied from 39.7% to 97.1% for presentation at meetings. Process measures for the first month and the end of the intervention were: adoption 70.7% (58/82) and 84.4% (103/122), reach 67.5% (108/160) and 55.0% (359/653), fidelity among patients with physician data form completion 86.3% (88/102) and 88.3% (294/333), versus fidelity among all eligible patients 83.8% (134/160) and 83.3% (544/653) respectively with no significant differences in fidelity at one month and the end of the intervention period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this pilot study, we achieved all prespecified benchmarks for proceeding to the multicenter CSP implementation except reach. Our results indicate a 1-month transition period will be adequate though regular reminders will be needed during full-scale implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":55286,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43678-023-00570-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We developed the Canadian Syncope Pathway (CSP) based on the Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) to aid emergency department (ED) syncope management. This pilot implementation study assessed patient inclusion, length of transition period, as well as process measures (engagement, reach, adoption, and fidelity) to prepare for multicenter implementation.

Methods: A non-randomized stepped wedge trial at two hospitals was conducted over a 7-month period. After 2-3 months in the control condition, the hospitals crossed over in a stepwise fashion to the intervention condition. Study participants were ED and non-ED physicians, or their delegates, and patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with syncope. We aimed to analyze patient characteristics, ED management including disposition decision, and CSRS recommendations application for all eligible patients during the intervention period. Our targets were 95% inclusion rate, 70% adoption (proportion of physicians who applied the pathway), 60% reach (intervention applied to eligible patients) and 70% fidelity (appropriate recommendations application) for all eligible patients. Clinical Trials registration NCT04790058.

Results: 1002 eligible patients (mean age 56.6 years; 51.0% males) were included: 349 patients during the control and 653 patients during the intervention period. Physician engagement varied from 39.7% to 97.1% for presentation at meetings. Process measures for the first month and the end of the intervention were: adoption 70.7% (58/82) and 84.4% (103/122), reach 67.5% (108/160) and 55.0% (359/653), fidelity among patients with physician data form completion 86.3% (88/102) and 88.3% (294/333), versus fidelity among all eligible patients 83.8% (134/160) and 83.3% (544/653) respectively with no significant differences in fidelity at one month and the end of the intervention period.

Conclusion: In this pilot study, we achieved all prespecified benchmarks for proceeding to the multicenter CSP implementation except reach. Our results indicate a 1-month transition period will be adequate though regular reminders will be needed during full-scale implementation.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
加拿大晕厥途径的实施:一项先导性非随机阶梯楔形试验。
背景:我们根据加拿大晕厥风险评分(CSRS)开发了加拿大晕厥通路(CSP),以帮助急诊科(ED)管理晕厥。这项试点实施研究评估了患者纳入情况、过渡期长度以及流程措施(参与度、覆盖范围、采用率和忠诚度),为多中心实施做准备。方法:在两家医院进行一项为期7个月的非随机阶梯式楔形试验。在控制状态下2-3个月后,医院逐步过渡到干预状态。研究参与者是ED和非ED医生或其代表,以及患者(年龄 ≥ 18岁)合并晕厥。我们旨在分析干预期间所有符合条件的患者的患者特征、ED管理(包括处置决策)和CSRS建议应用。我们的目标是95%的入选率、70%的采用率(应用该途径的医生比例)、60%的覆盖率(适用于符合条件的患者的干预)和70%的保真度(适用于适当的建议)。临床试验注册号NCT04790058。结果:包括1002名符合条件的患者(平均年龄56.6岁;51.0%男性):349名患者在对照期,653名患者处于干预期。医生在会议上的参与率从39.7%到97.1%不等。第一个月和干预结束时的过程测量为:采用70.7%(58/82)和84.4%(103/122),达到67.5%(108/160)和55.0%(359/653),完成医生数据表的患者忠诚度为86.3%(88/102)和88.3%(294/333),在所有符合条件的患者中,保真度分别为83.8%(134/160)和83.3%(544/653),在一个月和干预期结束时保真度没有显著差异。结论:在这项试点研究中,我们实现了除reach之外的所有预先指定的多中心CSP实施基准。我们的结果表明,一个月的过渡期将是足够的,尽管在全面实施期间需要定期提醒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
171
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CJEM is a peer-reviewed journal owned by CAEP. CJEM is published every 2 months (January, March, May, July, September and November). CJEM presents articles of interest to emergency care providers in rural, urban or academic settings. Publishing services are provided by the Canadian Medical Association.
期刊最新文献
Just the facts: diagnosing and managing trigeminal neuralgia in the emergency department Letter to the editor: further opportunities for rapid HIV testing. Just the facts: management of thrombolytic complications in acute stroke care in the emergency department Anti-inflammatories as adjunct treatment for cellulitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis Replacing the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment—Alcohol revised with the modified Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale for alcohol withdrawal to support management of alcohol withdrawal symptoms: potential impact on length of stay and complications
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1