Ben Ainsworth, Jeremy Horwood, Scott R Walter, Sascha Miller, Melanie Chalder, Frank De Vocht, James Denison-Day, Martha M C Elwenspoek, Helen J Curtis, Chris Bates, Amir Mehrkar, Seb Bacon, Ben Goldacre, Pippa Craggs, Richard Amlôt, Nick Francis, Paul Little, John Macleod, Michael Moore, Kate Morton, Cathy Rice, Jonathan Sterne, Beth Stuart, Lauren Towler, Merlin L Willcox, Lucy Yardley
{"title":"在英格兰的所有初级保健实践中实施细菌防御数字行为改变干预措施,以减少COVID-19大流行期间的呼吸道感染:使用opensafety平台的有效聚类随机对照试验。","authors":"Ben Ainsworth, Jeremy Horwood, Scott R Walter, Sascha Miller, Melanie Chalder, Frank De Vocht, James Denison-Day, Martha M C Elwenspoek, Helen J Curtis, Chris Bates, Amir Mehrkar, Seb Bacon, Ben Goldacre, Pippa Craggs, Richard Amlôt, Nick Francis, Paul Little, John Macleod, Michael Moore, Kate Morton, Cathy Rice, Jonathan Sterne, Beth Stuart, Lauren Towler, Merlin L Willcox, Lucy Yardley","doi":"10.1186/s13012-023-01321-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Germ Defence ( www.germdefence.org ) is an evidence-based interactive website that promotes behaviour change for infection control within households. To maximise the potential of Germ Defence to effectively reduce the spread of COVID-19, the intervention needed to be implemented at scale rapidly.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>With NHS England approval, we conducted an efficient two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effectiveness of randomising implementation of Germ Defence via general practitioner (GP) practices across England, UK, compared with usual care to disseminate Germ Defence to patients. GP practices randomised to the intervention arm (n = 3292) were emailed and asked to disseminate Germ Defence to all adult patients via mobile phone text, email or social media. Usual care arm GP practices (n = 3287) maintained standard management for the 4-month trial period and then asked to share Germ Defence with their adult patients. The primary outcome was the rate of GP presentations for respiratory tract infections (RTI) per patient. Secondary outcomes comprised rates of acute RTIs, confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses and suspected COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 symptoms, gastrointestinal infection diagnoses, antibiotic usage and hospital admissions. The impact of the intervention on outcome rates was assessed using negative binomial regression modelling within the OpenSAFELY platform. The uptake of the intervention by GP practice and by patients was measured via website analytics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Germ Defence was used 310,731 times. The average website satisfaction score was 7.52 (0-10 not at all to very satisfied, N = 9933). There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of RTIs between intervention and control practices (rate ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.96, 1.06, p = 0.70). This was similar to all other eight health outcomes. Patient engagement within intervention arm practices ranged from 0 to 48% of a practice list.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While the RCT did not demonstrate a difference in health outcomes, we demonstrated that rapid large-scale implementation of a digital behavioural intervention is possible and can be evaluated with a novel efficient prospective RCT methodology analysing routinely collected patient data entirely within a trusted research environment.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry (14602359) on 12 August 2020.</p>","PeriodicalId":54995,"journal":{"name":"Implementation Science","volume":"18 1","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10694966/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing Germ Defence digital behaviour change intervention via all primary care practices in England to reduce respiratory infections during the COVID-19 pandemic: an efficient cluster randomised controlled trial using the OpenSAFELY platform.\",\"authors\":\"Ben Ainsworth, Jeremy Horwood, Scott R Walter, Sascha Miller, Melanie Chalder, Frank De Vocht, James Denison-Day, Martha M C Elwenspoek, Helen J Curtis, Chris Bates, Amir Mehrkar, Seb Bacon, Ben Goldacre, Pippa Craggs, Richard Amlôt, Nick Francis, Paul Little, John Macleod, Michael Moore, Kate Morton, Cathy Rice, Jonathan Sterne, Beth Stuart, Lauren Towler, Merlin L Willcox, Lucy Yardley\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13012-023-01321-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Germ Defence ( www.germdefence.org ) is an evidence-based interactive website that promotes behaviour change for infection control within households. To maximise the potential of Germ Defence to effectively reduce the spread of COVID-19, the intervention needed to be implemented at scale rapidly.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>With NHS England approval, we conducted an efficient two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effectiveness of randomising implementation of Germ Defence via general practitioner (GP) practices across England, UK, compared with usual care to disseminate Germ Defence to patients. GP practices randomised to the intervention arm (n = 3292) were emailed and asked to disseminate Germ Defence to all adult patients via mobile phone text, email or social media. Usual care arm GP practices (n = 3287) maintained standard management for the 4-month trial period and then asked to share Germ Defence with their adult patients. The primary outcome was the rate of GP presentations for respiratory tract infections (RTI) per patient. Secondary outcomes comprised rates of acute RTIs, confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses and suspected COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 symptoms, gastrointestinal infection diagnoses, antibiotic usage and hospital admissions. The impact of the intervention on outcome rates was assessed using negative binomial regression modelling within the OpenSAFELY platform. The uptake of the intervention by GP practice and by patients was measured via website analytics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Germ Defence was used 310,731 times. The average website satisfaction score was 7.52 (0-10 not at all to very satisfied, N = 9933). There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of RTIs between intervention and control practices (rate ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.96, 1.06, p = 0.70). This was similar to all other eight health outcomes. Patient engagement within intervention arm practices ranged from 0 to 48% of a practice list.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While the RCT did not demonstrate a difference in health outcomes, we demonstrated that rapid large-scale implementation of a digital behavioural intervention is possible and can be evaluated with a novel efficient prospective RCT methodology analysing routinely collected patient data entirely within a trusted research environment.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry (14602359) on 12 August 2020.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54995,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Implementation Science\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10694966/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Implementation Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01321-z\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Implementation Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01321-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:细菌防御(www.germdefence.org)是一个以证据为基础的互动网站,旨在促进家庭内控制感染的行为改变。为了最大限度地发挥细菌防御的潜力,有效减少COVID-19的传播,需要迅速大规模实施干预措施。方法:在英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS England)的批准下,我们进行了一项有效的双臂(1:1比例)集群随机对照试验(RCT),以检验在英国英格兰通过全科医生(GP)实践随机实施细菌防御的有效性,与常规护理相比,向患者传播细菌防御。随机分配到干预组(n = 3292)的全科医生通过电子邮件发送并要求通过手机短信、电子邮件或社交媒体向所有成年患者传播细菌防御。常规护理组全科医生(n = 3287)在4个月的试验期内保持标准管理,然后要求与他们的成年患者分享细菌防御。主要结果是每个患者的呼吸道感染(RTI)的GP报告率。次要结局包括急性呼吸道感染发生率、COVID-19确诊和疑似诊断、COVID-19症状、胃肠道感染诊断、抗生素使用和住院率。在opensafety平台中使用负二项回归模型评估干预对转归率的影响。通过网站分析测量全科医生实践和患者对干预措施的接受程度。结果:细菌防御使用310731次。网站满意度平均得分为7.52分(0-10分完全不满意到非常满意,N = 9933)。没有证据表明干预组和对照组的rti发生率有差异(RR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.96, 1.06, p = 0.70)。这与其他8项健康结果相似。患者参与干预组实践的比例从0到48%不等。结论:虽然RCT没有证明健康结果的差异,但我们证明了快速大规模实施数字行为干预是可能的,并且可以通过一种新颖有效的前瞻性RCT方法进行评估,该方法完全在可信的研究环境中分析常规收集的患者数据。试验注册:该试验于2020年8月12日在ISRCTN注册中心(14602359)注册。
Implementing Germ Defence digital behaviour change intervention via all primary care practices in England to reduce respiratory infections during the COVID-19 pandemic: an efficient cluster randomised controlled trial using the OpenSAFELY platform.
Background: Germ Defence ( www.germdefence.org ) is an evidence-based interactive website that promotes behaviour change for infection control within households. To maximise the potential of Germ Defence to effectively reduce the spread of COVID-19, the intervention needed to be implemented at scale rapidly.
Methods: With NHS England approval, we conducted an efficient two-arm (1:1 ratio) cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effectiveness of randomising implementation of Germ Defence via general practitioner (GP) practices across England, UK, compared with usual care to disseminate Germ Defence to patients. GP practices randomised to the intervention arm (n = 3292) were emailed and asked to disseminate Germ Defence to all adult patients via mobile phone text, email or social media. Usual care arm GP practices (n = 3287) maintained standard management for the 4-month trial period and then asked to share Germ Defence with their adult patients. The primary outcome was the rate of GP presentations for respiratory tract infections (RTI) per patient. Secondary outcomes comprised rates of acute RTIs, confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses and suspected COVID-19 diagnoses, COVID-19 symptoms, gastrointestinal infection diagnoses, antibiotic usage and hospital admissions. The impact of the intervention on outcome rates was assessed using negative binomial regression modelling within the OpenSAFELY platform. The uptake of the intervention by GP practice and by patients was measured via website analytics.
Results: Germ Defence was used 310,731 times. The average website satisfaction score was 7.52 (0-10 not at all to very satisfied, N = 9933). There was no evidence of a difference in the rate of RTIs between intervention and control practices (rate ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% CI 0.96, 1.06, p = 0.70). This was similar to all other eight health outcomes. Patient engagement within intervention arm practices ranged from 0 to 48% of a practice list.
Conclusions: While the RCT did not demonstrate a difference in health outcomes, we demonstrated that rapid large-scale implementation of a digital behavioural intervention is possible and can be evaluated with a novel efficient prospective RCT methodology analysing routinely collected patient data entirely within a trusted research environment.
Trial registration: This trial was registered in the ISRCTN registry (14602359) on 12 August 2020.
期刊介绍:
Implementation Science is a leading journal committed to disseminating evidence on methods for integrating research findings into routine healthcare practice and policy. It offers a multidisciplinary platform for studying implementation strategies, encompassing their development, outcomes, economics, processes, and associated factors. The journal prioritizes rigorous studies and innovative, theory-based approaches, covering implementation science across various healthcare services and settings.